“Decades ago the national guard got obsolete equipment. But Congress began to boost income to the defense companies by giving first line equipment to the guard. This has to do with scratching the backs of big lobbyists.”
Not exactly.
Guards used to be equipped with out-dated and obsolete equipment and thereby unable to hit the line capable and fully integrated with the regular Army (and Air Force).
The equipping was to do with standardizing equipment, force-multiplying and integrated operations by having the same kit and capability. . .sharing the same training, logistics support and supply train as well. It actually saved money by doing so.
And lobbyists do not have the power many think they do. Politicians listen to lobbyists, from labor unions to defense contractors to other industries. . .so they learn about the product.
Lobbyists have to be careful because if they try and pressure the politician then the lobbyist is thrown out of the office and his competition now has access to the politicos.
And who do the politico’s listen to?
Voters.
Voters are the ones with the power, they are the one’s the politico’s try to keep happy, not the lobbyists, as the voters vote and if you keep your constituency happy then you get lots of votes and win elections.
I’ve worked in defense for thirty years as an employee of contractors. I’ve worked on contracts that built spares for equipment that had been pulled out of service. The spares went from delivery to a depot to scrap. It was purely a way to boost income. Now whether that money was allocated by Congress or somebody in the Pentagon, I can’t say. But I worked on future combat systems. That was a scheme hatched by Boeing and SAIC who were “co-integrators of integrators.” It was a colossal waste of money. Monumental. Only twenty cents of every dollar bought engineering or hardware. And it was, like the Boeing tanker deal, purely a congressional money allocation scheme.