Terror-Conscious Congress’ Sights Set on Military Bases

Bowing to pressure from the Senate and the Bush administration, House negotiators reluctantly agreed Wednesday to launch a new round of military base closures, but only after postponing the controversial action until after the next presidential election.

The deal to begin the base-closing process in 2005 is part of a $343-billion defense authorization bill expected to be approved as early as today in the House.

President Bush contends that many military installations are relics of past wars and can be consolidated or shut down to free up money--as much as $3.5 billion a year, the administration estimates--to reshape the Pentagon’s mission. The president reiterated the argument Tuesday in an address outlining his defense agenda.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and the Democratic-controlled Senate had sought to start closing bases as early as 2003. Rumsfeld had said he would recommend a presidential veto of the defense bill unless it authorized new closures.

But military bases, the engines of many local economies in cities and towns across America, are a sensitive political subject. House Republicans and Democrats alike were critical of the Bush-Senate proposal.

California has been hit hard by closures over the past decade, and lawmakers from the state have complained that the federal government has not paid its share to clean up old bases and convert them to civilian use. It is too early to tell which states would be targeted for the next round of base closings.

Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John W. Warner (R-Va.), who spearheaded the base-closing effort in Congress, said Wednesday that the agreement would help free up billions of dollars in future years for homeland security and other pressing needs exposed by the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

“We need those resources to do those things that are important,” Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told reporters.

Warner, the committee’s Republican leader, said he expected the Pentagon would signal its satisfaction with the deal. “It now, I am confident, will become law,” he said.

Vice President Dick Cheney, a former Defense secretary, helped the senators press their case for base closures. Bush’s prestige as a wartime leader also helped.

“We’ve got to support the commander-in-chief,” Warner said.

Lawmakers from states such as North Dakota and Maine, home to perennially targeted bases, are already maneuvering to again protect their military facilities.

Aside from the base-closure provision, the defense bill would authorize $343 billion in spending in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1 for both the Department of Defense and military programs in the Energy Department.

Both houses of Congress must approve the bill before it can be sent to the president for his signature.

While the agreement to begin base closings is crucial, several additional steps must be taken before any facilities can be shut down. The Pentagon must evaluate its force structure and certify that closures are justified. Defense officials would have to pay particular attention to finances, certifying that closures would actually save money for the armed services by 2011.

Then the president, after checking with Congress, would name a nine-member commission in 2005 to study a proposed list of bases to be closed. The commission could adjust the list and then send it to the president for approval. The president could either ask the commission for further changes or send the list to Congress for an up-or-down vote.

Congress is empowered to shut down funding for any base it chooses. But the complex politics of military base construction and closure--with various influential lawmakers seeking to promote home-state interests--have in recent years led congressional leaders and defense experts to conclude that the only practical way to shut down bases is by insulating the process as much as possible. This led to the establishment of a base-closure commission and the requirement for a simple up-or-down vote in Congress.

Four rounds of base closings since 1988 led to the shutdown or reconfiguration of 451 installations across the country, including 97 major facilities--29 of which were in California. California’s two senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, both Democrats, voted against a base-closing proposal when it came to the Senate floor in late September.