Hampton Roads lawmakers wary of base-closures plan

Congress appears to be skeptical of an Obama administration proposal to begin a new round of base closings within 24 months, with legislators raising questions about whether previous rounds saved enough money and were worth the upheaval they caused around the country.

Members of Hampton Roads' congressional delegation generally fall in two camps on base closings: those who say if the Pentagon has to downsize, Virginia is well-positioned to keep its installations - and others who say 'Don't even think about it.'

The region's federal legislators all agree that should base closings begin, Hampton Roads won't be caught flat-footed as it was in 2005 when the closure panel, which also mandated the Army's departure from Fort Monroe, recommended shuttering Oceana Naval Air Station.

The surprise targeting of Oceana left community leaders scrambling, though they eventually succeeded in winning a reprieve for the Navy's East Coast master jet base. While the region's bipartisan delegation often spars along party lines, legislators share a common desire to protect local military installations.

President Barack Obama's budget plans, released last week, include spending $2.4 billion over five years to identify and close military installations that Pentagon leaders say no longer would be needed.

Obama's plan proposes that the facilities be identified in 2015 and the closings begin in 2016, "after the economy is projected to have more fully recovered." No money for closings would be allocated until 2015.

But nothing will happen unless Congress approves the creation of a new Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission, known as BRAC. Last year, it shot down the president's request for two rounds of base closings.

This year's proposal already has drawn fire, including from Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. The Michigan Democrat indicated in a recent report in The Hill, a Washington newspaper, that he's not taking the request seriously because the Pentagon didn't ask for any BRAC money in next year's budget plan. They didn't "put their money where their mouth is this year," he said.

Several legislators, including some from Virginia, also questioned whether the upheaval is worth the benefits.

Pentagon officials said the proposed closings eventually would lead to annual savings of $1 billion to $2 billion after a few years. They said the previous five rounds collectively saved $12.5 billion a year - a claim that legislators, including U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, asked them to back up with a detailed report.

During a committee hearing Wednesday, Kaine exhorted Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to find a less disruptive way to cut defense spending.

"When BRAC was announced, what happens is that every community that has military assets - whether they're ultimately going to be on the chopping block or not - they lawyer up, they accountant up, they public relations up. There's an economic effect in the community of anxiety and uncertainty that can have its own economic effect," he told Hagel. "And if we're going to do all that to produce - if it's been $12.5 billion for five BRAC rounds, if we're going to do all that to produce $2.5 billion of savings - I really wonder if it's worth the trouble."

Levin agreed.

"I would urge our constituents not to start lawyering up and hiring consultants, because it's got a long, long way to go before Congress approves another BRAC round," Levin said.

Kaine said in an earlier interview that reducing military real estate should be considered as part of a larger effort to reduce deficit spending and as the Defense Department slows its rate of growth after a decade of war spending.

But before considering any domestic bases, look overseas, Kaine said. "Europe is sort of an example of fixed infrastructure that is sort of based on a yesterday's reality."

Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes, a leader on the House Armed Services Committee, opposes cutting any defense spending.

"If you believe, as I believe, that is the wrong direction, then you should be against a BRAC," the Chesapeake Republican said. "Once you have closed these facilities, you'll never open them again."

The Pentagon argues that reducing the inventory of military bases makes logical sense as the military begins to slim down its workforce.

"The only effective way to do that is through base realignment and closure," Robert Hale, the Pentagon's comptroller, said during a budget briefing last week. The department wants to eliminate 50,000 jobs from its 800,000 civilian workforce over the next five years, he said. The administration's defense strategy also calls for reducing the size of the Army and Marine Corps.

The Pentagon hasn't identified which installations might be vulnerable, but Hale indicated they likely would look at consolidating military health care facilities.

U.S. Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia is uncertain whether another BRAC round is necessary. He doesn't want to see any Virginia installations closed but would rather spend limited defense dollars on new ships instead of preserving bases elsewhere that might no longer be needed.

"We're going to have a military budget that is going to be under fiscal constraints," Warner said.

U.S. Reps. Scott Rigell of Virginia Beach and Rob Wittman of Westmoreland County - both Republicans - have argued that it costs too much to close military installations and doesn't save enough money in the long run.

"Of all the things we could do and spend our time on, this doesn't merit the effort," Rigell said. "They can't just... put a chain around the front gate."

Federal environmental regulations require the Pentagon to bring excess military property up to "pristine condition," he said.

Wittman conducted a pre-emptive strike on Obama's BRAC proposal, organizing a subcommittee hearing weeks before the president's budget to argue that a new round of base closings is unnecessary and too expensive.

Wittman said the last BRAC round, which included construction projects to consolidate some military facilities, has ended up costing $35 billion - about $14 billion more than anticipated. The Pentagon doesn't expect to start reaping savings from that effort until 2018.

U.S. Rep. Bobby Scott, a Newport News Democrat, said the loss of income to local communities that rely on military installations for jobs outweighs the savings.

"You threaten the economy of every community within 20 miles of every military base," Scott said. "It has a devastating impact."

Meanwhile, Craig Quigley, executive director of the Hampton Roads Military and Federal Facilities Alliance, and leaders of other groups focused on the region's economic ties to the military are preparing for the worst.

Quigley, whose organization was created by local leaders after the 2005 BRAC to guard and expand the region's military assets, said the alliance, which is funded by 10 cities and three counties, will "take nothing for granted."... "There is no 'gimme putt' in this process. We will be absolutely prepared should this occur."

At the same time, the state has sought to bolster its ties with the Pentagon. Gov. Bob McDonnell established a cabinet post, Secretary of Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security, now headed by Terrie Suit, a former state legislator. Suit's office has sought to develop more direct relationships with the Pentagon and the defense industry.

McDonnell also recently appointed retired Adm. John Harvey, who lives in Charlottesville, to volunteer as head of a state commission analyzing Virginia's military assets and compiling information to help defend their existence.

Suit acknowledged that while the military might be a huge part of the state's economy, citing dependence isn't a good tactic to sway a BRAC panel.

"Our focus is establishing what the value is to the military by being in Virginia," Suit said.

###