Congress Hates Military-Base Closings, but Can Chuck Hagel Do It Without Their Approval?

The Defense secretary says he is studying his options.

The entrance to Camp Justice at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
National Journal
Jordain Carney
Add to Briefcase
Jordain Carney
March 5, 2014, 12:12 p.m.

The Pentagon’s budget sets up an up­hill battle with Con­gress by re­quest­ing fur­ther do­mest­ic base clos­ures and re­align­ment, but the De­fense De­part­ment’s top of­fi­cial could try to give mem­bers the slip.

As part of the de­part­ment’s 2015 fisc­al-year budget re­quest, the Pentagon wants a round of base clos­ures and re­align­ment — known as BRAC — for U.S. bases in 2017.

“We think BRAC is a smart po­s­i­tion to have, as you know we have called for it again, we’re go­ing to con­tin­ue work through all this,” De­fense Sec­ret­ary Chuck Hagel said at an Sen­ate Armed Ser­vices Com­mit­tee hear­ing Wed­nes­day. “I’ve got some op­tions as sec­ret­ary of De­fense in law “¦ through a sec­tion of Art­icle 10.”

The sec­ret­ary didn’t spe­cify what op­tions he could have in re­gard to re­du­cing over­head, but a House staffer sug­ges­ted last month that un­der a pro­vi­sion of fed­er­al law deal­ing with the De­fense De­part­ment, Hagel could close bases and only have to no­ti­fy Con­gress be­fore­hand — rather than ask its per­mis­sion.

If the sec­ret­ary wants to close a base with at least 300 ci­vil­ian em­ploy­ees or cut more than 1,000, or more than 50 per­cent, of ci­vil­ian jobs at a base, he must no­ti­fy the Armed Ser­vices com­mit­tees as part of the de­part­ment’s an­nu­al budget re­quest, ac­cord­ing to fed­er­al law.

That no­ti­fic­a­tion must in­clude an “eval­u­ation of the fisc­al, loc­al eco­nom­ic, budget­ary, en­vir­on­ment­al, stra­tegic, and op­er­a­tion­al con­sequences of such clos­ure or re­align­ment.”

What Con­gress could do to stop Hagel is un­clear, but Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., has pressed Pentagon of­fi­cials — in­clud­ing Bob Work, the pres­id­ent’s deputy De­fense sec­ret­ary nom­in­ee — to cla­ri­fy where any leg­al au­thor­ity the Pentagon could have comes from.

“I be­lieve that Con­gress should be in the po­s­i­tion to ap­prove BRAC, and there should not be a run­around done,” Ayotte said last week.

As Pentagon of­fi­cials have ac­know­ledged, mem­bers are loath to close bases that could cost jobs back in their home states and would cost money up front be­fore sav­ings kick in. Deputy De­fense Sec­ret­ary Christine Fox said be­fore the budget was re­leased that De­fense of­fi­cials were hear­ing that their base-clos­ure re­quest would be “dead on ar­rival.”

Rising costs from a 2005 re­com­mend­a­tion for a round of base clos­ure and re­align­ment left some mem­bers of Con­gress hes­it­ant to try again. A com­mis­sion ori­gin­ally es­tim­ated that it would cost the Pentagon $21 bil­lion to fol­low its re­com­mend­a­tions, but, ac­cord­ing to a 2012 GAO re­port, the cost ended up around $35.1 bil­lion.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., touched on that dur­ing Wed­nes­day’s hear­ing, adding that she “cer­tainly strongly dis­agrees with an­oth­er BRAC round at this time.”

But the De­fense De­part­ment is plan­ning to fol­low forth­com­ing re­com­mend­a­tions to close or re­align bases across Europe, which aren’t sub­ject to con­gres­sion­al ap­prov­al. The Pentagon has re­duced its in­fra­struc­ture in Europe by 30 per­cent since 2000.

But Shaheen sug­ges­ted that mem­bers of Con­gress do need to know what re­com­mend­a­tions are be­ing made about base clos­ures in Europe, and throughout the world, be­fore they can con­sider re­quests to close or re­align bases in their own back­yards.

And Rep. Mi­chael Turn­er, R-Ohio, sug­ges­ted dur­ing his ques­tion­ing at a House Armed Ser­vices sub­com­mit­tee hear­ing Wed­nes­day that the European bases are cent­ral to the mil­it­ary’s over­all mis­sion.

Gen­er­al Dav­id Rodrig­uez, head of the U.S. Africa Com­mand, agreed, say­ing the bases are “crit­ic­al for our mis­sion in Africa.”

What We're Following See More »
DOESN’T RULE OUT FUTURE CASES
Supreme Court Punts Gerrymandering Cases
28 minutes ago
THE LATEST

"The Supreme Court on Monday passed up its two opportunities this term to rule on when and whether states violate the Constitution by drawing electoral maps that sharply favor one political party." In a dispute over Maryland's congressional map, the Supreme Court "upheld a district court judge’s decision not to grant a preliminary injunction" blocking the map. In the Wisconsin case Gill v. Whitford, the justices ruled that Democratic voters lacked standing to challenge the redrawn electoral boundaries at the Supreme Court. Seven justices
"agreed to give the challengers another shot at making their case in the lower courts."

Source:
ALSO RUSSIA, CYPRUS CONCERNS
Ross Still Has Stake in Chinese Companies
1 hours ago
THE DETAILS

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross failed to keep his promise to divest from his company holdings upon entering government, a Forbes investigation has found. Ross reportedly kept his stakes in companies co-owned by the Chinese government, a firm linked to Vladimir Putin’s inner circle, and a Cyprus bank caught up in the Robert Mueller investigation. Forbes reports that Ross’s family continued to have an interest in these holdings while he dealt with China and Russia in his official role, even while knowing that his family’s fortunes were linked to the countries. Although the arrangements appear to be legal, Forbes says Ross may have broken the law by submitting a sworn statement to officials in November saying he divested of everything he promised he would. His spokesperson said Ross did not lie and has filed amended paperwork.

Source:
MORE LEEWAY FOR GENERALS
Pentagon Greenlights Offensive Cyberattacks
1 hours ago
THE LATEST

"The Pentagon has quietly empowered the United States Cyber Command to take a far more aggressive approach to defending the nation against cyberattacks, a shift in strategy that could increase the risk of conflict with the foreign states that sponsor malicious hacking groups." The policy change empowers the command to conduct cyberattacks against adversaries, including "nearly daily raids" against enemy networks and "non-kinetic" attacks against military targets. The purpose of the change, according to policy documents, is to “contest dangerous adversary activity before it impairs our national power" and to impel adversaries to "shift resources to defense and reduce attacks.”

Source:
“WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING”
Border Patrol Chief Weighs In On Family Separation
1 hours ago
THE LATEST

Manuel Padilla, the Border Patrol chief for the Rio Grande Valley, expressed his desire to CBS News for action to be taken to address family separation at the border. Separations have spiked under the Trump Administration's "zero-tolerance" policy. "We created this situation by not doing anything," Padilla said, arguing that previous immigration policy had created a "vacuum" for other families to attempt to cross the border.

Source:
MCCONNELL WANTS A TREATY
Senators Want to Rubber Stamp Any North Korean Deal
5 days ago
THE LATEST

"As Trump signed a joint statement with Kim Jong Un that offered few details on how the North Korean leader would make good on his vow to denuclearize, Republicans on Capitol Hill said Tuesday that they want and expect the White House to submit any final agreement for their approval." Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called for any agreement to be in the form of a treaty.

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login