The LA Times recently published an article about the next round of military base closings in 2005, under the headline "The Race to Steal Bases Heats Up." Apparently, California is seen as the most vulnerable state in terms of base closures. The main premise of the article is that other states are circling like vultures to grab the remains of whatever is left of the bases that end up closing. It seems that, contrary to what the Daschle campaign was saying about Ellsworth AFB in Rapid City being vulnerable to closure, Ellsworth is in a position of strength, because it may have a mission added to its role that was formerly the mission of a base closed in California. Then there's this passage in the LAT article:
But key states such as Colorado, New Mexico, Florida and Texas that voted for Bush are not supposed to get any favors. And liberal states such as California are not supposed to be punished. Indeed, politics and lobbying will play no role in the evaluations, said Raymond DuBois, the Pentagon's chief architect for the coming base closures. The agency has sealed off lobbyists and consultants from the secret analytical work being done by the military services and seven specialized cross-service teams inside the Defense Department. Their recommendations are expected in a few months. "Anyone who wants to trust us can appreciate the fact that we have wrapped this process in a pretty tight seal," DuBois said in an interview. In February, the Defense Department published a list of eight official criteria it would use to evaluate base closures, nearly all of them involving military or economic issues. DuBois added that cities that hired lobbyists or promised lavish spending programs to keep bases were just wasting their money. "We cannot take into account promises of future investments," he said. "I don't want wealthier states outbidding other areas."
It has been reported that the Rapid City Chamber of Commerce plans to spend $1.3 million on lobbyists to protect Ellsworth.
Recent Comments