BRAC Breakdown

Only in theory are base closings apolitical.

When Republican John Thune was sworn in as South Dakota's junior senator in 2005, he was welcomed as a conquering hero. He had just defeated Minority Leader Tom Daschle in the most important Senate race of 2004, and his GOP colleagues giddily celebrated his victory over the Democrat they called "the obstructionist-in-chief."

But on May 13, the adulation faded as suddenly as it began. That was the day the Pentagon released the list of recommended base closings and realignments that would go to the independent Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission. On that list was Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota's second-largest employer with 3,852 jobs, which was slated for closure.

No member of Congress who represented an endangered facility took the news well, but none took it harder than Thune. During his campaign, he told voters that his connections to the Bush administration would better serve Ellsworth's interests than Daschle's seniority. Now he looked not only foolish but ineffective, and Democrats were quick to attack him. In response, Thune introduced a bill to delay the base-closing round. He also played a few other cards to signal his displeasure to the Bush administration. First, he declined to take a position on a key administration trade initiative. Then he announced his opposition to the nomination of John Bolton as U.N. ambassador. When asked whether his opposition to Bolton had anything to do with base closing, he told the Associated Press, "I'm concerned about our diplomatic posture as a nation, and I'm concerned about our defensive posture. These issues are not unrelated."

Thus the truth about the base closure and realignment process was cleverly revealed: Base closings, like diplomacy and defense policy, are apolitical in theory only.

That wasn't the intention back in 1988 when Congress crafted the original legislation that created the commission. At the time, lawmakers recognized that the only way it could work was if the process was designed to minimize political interference. That's why the House and Senate can only accept or reject the commission's recommendations as a whole, and it's why only the president can send the recommendations back to the panel for revision before deciding whether to accept or reject the package as a whole. Either way, it's an all-or-nothing deal.

But while you can take the politics out of the process, you can't keep it out. The 1995 round witnessed the spectacle of President Clinton's machinations to avoid signing the death warrant for McClellan Air Force Base in California, a state that was critical to his 1996 reelection bid. A senior Democratic congressman accused the commission itself of playing politics that year, wondering aloud why Georgia, home to House Speaker Newt Gingrich, was spared from closings.

Since then, both parties have played the process for all it's worth, with members vying for funds to dress up and bolster the position of their local bases in anticipation of the 2005 round. Even challengers have found the BRAC process a fertile ground for politicking: In 2004, Rep. Tom Allen, D-Maine, was criticized by his Republican opponent for leaving the Armed Services Committee and taking a position on the Energy and Commerce Committee at a time when Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery and Brunswick Naval Air Station were possible targets for closure.

With Portsmouth slated for closure and Brunswick for realignment under the May 2005 recommendations, Allen's safe House seat now looks a little less safe for him. But he's not in nearly as much trouble as Rep. Rob Simmons, R-Conn., who recently won reelection in a politically marginal district in large part because he told voters that his clout could help save the submarine base in New London. That base also was recommended for closure by the Pentagon. As for Thune, the outlook is not so dim: He's not up for reelection until 2010.