Hacker News Reader

> procurement fraud looks quite different (e.g. having anpart for your weapon made in every congressional district, a tactic developed for the B-1)

Why is that fraud? That seems more like congresspeople having something to offer each other, to build up relationships and interdependence. What we have now is that our 2 parties don’t care about each other and don’t need each other, so there’s no reason for them to work together.

View on HN

Too many districts mean high costs because of the need to communicate between all the locations. Shipping parts from state to state is not cheap.

Now be careful not to go too far. I wand a few experts in the B1 scattered around the country - I don't want someone to be able to bomb one office/factory and we lose all ability to modify/build the B1. However there needs to be a balance.

Better would be if two districts produced B1 parts, and then a different produces tank, and then still another is doing ... That is every district should have something, but no one project is everywhere.

> Too many districts mean high costs because of the need to communicate between all the locations. Shipping parts from state to state is not cheap.

I agree, this isn't the cheapest way to develop. I just don't think I'd call it "fraud".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com