Area Looks to Next Round of Base Closures
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26–The stakes are high.
Almost 4,300 jobs. More than $233 million in annual wages. Millions more pumped back into the local economy.
The seacoast community doesn’t want to lose the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Area leaders don’t think the shipyard will face a serious threat in the next round of base closures, scheduled for 2005, but Defense Department officials say every base is potentially on the chopping block. Including the shipyard.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he wants to eliminate 25 percent of active bases – more than 100 of about 425 such installations – in what defense officials say could be the final and most contentious round of closures yet. “We know there are too many unnecessary bases out there,” Pentagon spokesman Glenn Flood said. “But some people say what’s left is the real meat of the infrastructure. So we have communities that are probably going to be very vocal.”
He said that no base would be exempt from the process. “We’re starting with a blank sheet,” Flood said. “We’re looking at every base.”
Complicating matters in the next round are President Bush’s war on terror and the unrest in the Middle East. In gearing up for the fight to save their bases, community officials and politicians cite these new threats as cause for avoiding or delaying any further closures.
“Proponents can make a populist sounding appeal that we need all the bases we can get because of homeland security and the war on terror. The counter argument from the Pentagon is that these are bases we’ve determined we don’t need,” said Peter W. Singer, a national security expert at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. “What you have is a duel between military and political need.”
Communities in an estimated 20 states have created organizations to protect military bases from possible closure, including Portsmouth’s Seacoast Shipyard Association. The groups will be intent on lobbying congressional leaders to spare their bases as the Pentagon creates a new Base Realignment and Closure Commission that will decide on any new closings.
The Shipyard Association released a report earlier this year outlining the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard’s economic impact on the region, stating that the shipyard last year accounted for a civilian payroll of over $233 million to almost 4,300 employees from Maine, New Hampshire and Massachusetts.
In response to the war on terror, the Bush administration has increased its 2002 defense spending by $33 billion and requested an additional increase of $48 billion for 2003. Analysts predict that defense spending is likely to be sustained at such levels for at least a few years, giving local officials hope that the Pentagon might postpone plans to close any more military bases.
But that isn’t likely, experts say.
“After Sept. 11 everyone thought that base closures would be thrown out the window. That’s not the case,” said Tim Ford, deputy executive director of the National Association of Installation Developers, a Washington group that deals with economic development at military sites. “I think the thought from the administration is they want to be able to use resources to fight the war on terrorism and not support infrastructure that they’re not using,” he said.
Congress’s General Accounting Office released a report earlier this year stating that the Defense Department has saved $16.7 billion a year by closing more than 350 installations in the first four rounds of closures. The report outlines expected additional savings of $6 billion a year.
Ford said those savings are hard to argue with from the Pentagon’s standpoint, even in light of terrorist threats and the potential war with Iraq.
“The military has already been up front [by saying that] they feel they have a 25 percent excess capacity,” he said. “I don’t think there’s any scenario that they would feel they could change that number.”
An area member of the Shipyard Association said he’s not overly concerned that the next round of base closings will present a major threat to the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
“I guess I would be cautiously optimistic,” said Russ Van Billiard, who is also a retired shipyard worker. “They should be in good shape but you never know.”
In the last round of closures the Pentagon eliminated all but four of the nation’s naval bases, leaving two on the East Coast and two on the West Coast, one of which is in Hawaii.
Van Billiard said that Portsmouth is the only shipyard that specializes in working on the Navy’s 688-class nuclear submarine, which represents the vast majority of subs in the Navy’s fleet. He said that the specialization probably saved the shipyard in the last round of closures in 1995 and should ensure its safety in the future.
Sen. Bob Smith, R-NH, a vocal opponent of base closings in the past, will step down in January as the state’s senior senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee. A Smith spokeswoman said the senator has always fought closings. “He believes that our national defense should not be further reduced,” Lisa Harrison said. “He believes the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard is too integral a part of our nation’s defense to even consider closure.”
Sen. Judd Gregg, R-NH, said that as a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense he would also work to protect the shipyard. “I will continue to work with the shipyard and the community, as I have done in the past, to guarantee that the vital role of the shipyard in our national defense is properly presented, understood and evaluated,” he said.
Analysts say that instead of arguing against closures on the basis of the war on terror, communities should focus on a base’s uniqueness, such as Portsmouth’s ability to work on submarines.
“I don’t find the homeland security argument convincing,” said Singer of Brookings. “I think a better plan is to focus on making the base relevant.”
Rep. Tom Allen, D-Maine, said that in addition to the shipyard’s specialization, its workers make it invaluable.
“I’m very impressed by the way the Portsmouth yard has improved their productivity and performance,” said Allen, who sits on the Armed Services Committee. “They’re now starting to finish their projects on time and ahead of budget, and that’s the most important thing they can do.”
Published in Foster’s Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
