U.S. Senators in Firefight Over Full Spectrum Warrior

July 18, 2007

A dust-up between a pair of U.S. senators has expanded to include the popular 2004 military-themed video game Full Spectrum Warrior.

As reported by the Omaha World-Herald, the battle between Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) is over earmarks, the practice of appropriating federal funds for projects favored by members of Congress.

The Nelson-Coburn spat began last week when Coburn tried to eliminate a $7.5 million earmark which Nelson (seen at left) hoped to steer toward Omaha defense contractor 21st Century Systems Inc. As reported by the World-News:

A Coburn spokesman compared 21CSI military computer software to video games and criticized the project as classic pork barrel spending.

Nelson defended the 21CSI earmark as important to national defense and fired back by digging up a $5 million earmark which went in part to fund development of Full Spectrum Warrior.

The earmark... involved the Institute of Creative Technologies, which has received millions through federal earmarks over the years... One product of the funding was a video game called Full Spectrum Warrior that proved commercially successful but of limited military use...

A spokesman for Sen. Nelson said:

Senator Coburn's derided the research and development work done in Nebraska by mischaracterizing it as 'video games' and deemed it unworthy of funding, while ignoring and tacitly approving a $5 million earmark for his home state that actually does fund video game development.

Posted in People Politics & Legislation Video Game Industry/Economics

Comments

Submitted by E. Zachary Knight (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 09:16.

Wow. Senators fighting over who's video game gets funding. Now that is comedy.

But seriously, federal military funding is an important thing to consider and we don't want this money going to frivolous means. But if it is for more serious and better simulation software then I am all for it.

Submitted by Korrd (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 09:23.

It's like listening to children bicker...

You're both idiots. Please retire.

Submitted by MaskedPixelante (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 09:51.

They should spend their money on more important things... like getting the troops OUT of Iraq.

Submitted by Terminator44 (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 10:00.

Once again, politicians can't seem to tell the difference between military simulators and commercial video games. Except this time, it seems to be the other way around.

Submitted by Brokenscope (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 10:26.

Um...

They don't need to add funding to get our troops out of Iraq.

Submitted by Gameboy (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 11:34.

Here's a better idea. Make earmarks illegal. Or at least limit them. That's the real issue I have with this case. It' be hilarious to see how many earmarks such a bill would have tacked on if nothing else.

Submitted by Ace of Sevens (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 13:25.

This is ludicrous. It seems liek the current political system is all the states pool their money, then each representative tries to get the money to their state at the expense of all the others, meaning the best strategy for voters is to get the guy who will funnel the most away from other ststes to theirs, not do what's best for the country. I think some sort of new rule restricting earmarks is in order.

Submitted by rpboyer (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 13:53.

I'm a little confused...

How was this supposed $5 Million dollar earmark for Coburn's home state? ICT is in California not Oklahoma.

That aside, as I remember Full Spectrum Warrior came out a while ago and was derived from a larger, purely military project. Perhaps this is merely a case of using hind site to see that funding these type of projects is a waste of money, as it was probably not known what the end result would be when ICT received that earmark.

In any case, earmarks are a classic form of government pork. Sadly, since it would be up to congress to make them illegal, and they all use them to help get reelected, then the chance of such practices becoming illegal are slim to none.

Submitted by ZippyDSMlee (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 13:57.

Gameboy
but without the prok he piggies go to Washington to fight for what reason is there for them to go? surely not to help govern the people!

Submitted by Verbinator (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 13:57.

Obviously that was money that could have been spent sending congress persons and their families (or whatever) on official junkets to investigate conditions along the beaches of Carribean nations, or to the capitals of Western Europe to investigate the fine restaurant and shopping district trade.

Submitted by Dustry Joe (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 18:44.

FSP didn't even become a success until THQ got their bloody lil' fingers in on it. If they didn't want in, it wouldn't have even gone anywhere near as commercial.

Submitted by Dave (not verified) on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 20:37.

Its pretty easy to attract attention to your fight when you say tax dollars are being spent on video games. It might not be true but it makes for a great sound bit.

Submitted by Kaex (not verified) on Fri, 07/20/2007 - 20:12.

The current system that dictates how government departments get funding is the root cause of all of this. Currently, if something comes up that a department wants to spend money on, they have to factor it into their next year's budget. Congress then has to meet to decide whether or not they can get the money. It then takes time to actually get the money to the department. Earmarks are used as a fast track through this system. Without the use of earmarks, almost all independant government contractors would go out of business waiting for payment. If there were no earmarks, it would be almost impossible for the government and military to get their hands on innovative products in a timely manner. This is widely known to contractors as the "Valley of Death". You can read more about it here:

http://www.iriinc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=5226&TEMPLATE=...

Shout box

Uncharted NES: Critics: 'Left Behind' game glorifies violence- http://tinyurl.com/wu64s02/12/2012 - 4:34pm

Zen: I felt Brutal Legends was a funny & beautiful look at the world of rock from Double Fines point of view. The only parts I wasn't hot for were the RTS bits as it felt forced. Otherwise fantastic.02/12/2012 - 1:34pm

DorthLous: Passed 1.5M$. And I'd also say that Brutal Legend is far from being a bad game. I just think it was a few levels under what people expected from the people working on the project.02/11/2012 - 8:25am

Technogeek: Brutal Legend wasn't bad so much as "marketing had no idea how the game actually played", causing it to suffer accordingly.02/10/2012 - 10:38pm

RedMage: It looks the CIA's website has been DDOS'ed. Anon?02/10/2012 - 7:52pm

RedMage: Brutal Legend.02/10/2012 - 7:52pm

ddrfr33k: Has anything Tim Schafer ever made been of crap caliber? I'm struggling to think of one...02/10/2012 - 7:37pm

Guamish: I think it is in good hands. Tim did a game for the GDC award show and that was fun for how short it was.02/10/2012 - 12:22pm

Andrew Eisen: It'll be tragic if the game ultimately sucks.02/10/2012 - 12:17pm

james_fudge: $1.3 million02/10/2012 - 11:32am

Uncharted NES: Germany Says It Won't Sign ACTA [Update: ... Yet]- http://tinyurl.com/7r2twrg02/10/2012 - 11:21am

Andrew Eisen: Damn. Double Fine's Kickstarter fund has already passed a million dollars.02/09/2012 - 8:16pm

Andrew Eisen: Audrey didn't quote the sassy parts. Here's IGN's article: http://wii.ign.com/articles/121/1218359p1.html And here's my original post: http://tinyurl.com/7y68a3902/09/2012 - 7:50pm

james_fudge: I hope you some said something sassy! Where's the link?02/09/2012 - 7:46pm

Andrew Eisen: Hey, neat. IGN quoted a blog I had writen only two hours earlier. I certainly timed that one pretty well.02/09/2012 - 7:38pm

Andrew Eisen: Toki Tori has been added to the Humble Bundle for Android.02/09/2012 - 5:11pm

james_fudge: Thanks for the heads-up DorthLous02/09/2012 - 4:33pm

DorthLous: Will do, my apologies.02/09/2012 - 4:14pm

Andrew Eisen: I appreciate the heads up but please keep typo alerts to the specific article's comments or PMs.02/09/2012 - 3:33pm

DorthLous: The title says 30, but in the article, the developer says it's like a 20% net tax http://www.gamepolitics.com/2012/02/09/developers-call-facebook-currency-transaction-fee-thirty-percent-tax02/09/2012 - 2:43pm

All shouts

<< Return To Top

Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :