A common conversation I get into with some of the more left-leaning folks I know are military flyovers at sporting events. It popped up again following the Superbowl, where there was a military flyover by F-18's, even though the roof of the stadium was closed. People against the flyovers would point out that 'based on the aircraft’s operational cost, the time it took pilots in the F-18 jets to fly the mission and a backup plane', it cost the Navy $450,000 to provide that flyover.
The Navy's side of the story is that the only real cost was the $109,000 for fuel for the planes...that their pilots time and the planes operational costs exist regardless, and are not part of the occasion. In that case, if you look at what companies pay for commercial time during the Superbowl, $109,000 to get your planes on TV is a pretty fair return in terms of P.R. and recruiting.
I totally side with the Navy on this one. From my time in uniform, I know the official policy is that those pilots are being paid 24 hours a day, whether they are flying a plane or at home with their family's. The only part I question is why the jet's flew in all the way from Virginia....I find it hard to believe that there wasn't a more convenient, less fuel burning option closer to the site of the Superbowl that could have provided this flyover.
Why bring this up now, a month after the Superbowl? Well, a Representative from Minnesota, Betty McCollum plans to
introduce a bill soon that would prohibit Pentagon sponsorships of dragsters, Indy cars, stock cars and motorcycle racing. She also wants to introduce legislation that would do away with tax breaks that track owners get for making improvements to their tracks. Earlier this month, the Representative attempted to add an amendment to some legislation that would have prohibited the Defense Department from sponsoring NASCAR teams.
I'm a NASCAR fan, and for the most part, I see the money spent on sponsoring racing teams the same way I see flyovers...a useful PR and Recruiting tool. As for the tax breaks....I am okay with going after those. Rep. McCollum's research said that it would bring an estimated $45 MILLION a year doing away with those tax breaks. I am fine with that...while I personally will continue to use turbotax to find every deduction I can on my taxes, nothing would make me happier than going to some flat-rate, no loophole, no 'tax-breaks' system.
The only part that the Representative lost me on was this:
McCollum insisted that she has nothing against NASCAR.
"This isn't about NASCAR," McCollum said. "I've watched the Indy 500, the Daytona 500. I have friends who are avid fans. ...
That's kind of like when some gun-grabber says I have nothing against gun owners...I'm a hunter and I own a $2000 dollar over/under shotgun...I'm just like you.
I wonder if anyone on her staff has told her yet that the Indy 500 isn't run by NASCAR...
My daughter came away from a local air show with a calendar featuring the Thunderbirds and a burning desire to enlist in the Air Force. Granted, she's nine so that doesn't mean too much right now, but I think it's a fine idea, so I'm encouraging it. Good recruiting, little outlay for the swag.
ReplyDeleteThe Rep. is an idiot, which of course you know.
I think I'm a paranoid cynic. When I see BS like this, I wonder what she's doing that she doesn't want anyone to notice. It smells like a diversion.
ReplyDelete