Commission Votes to Save Ellsworth Air Force Base
There's also this chart:
Posted on 08/26/2005 6:57:26 AM PDT by CedarDave
Commission Votes to Save Ellsworth Base
By LIZ SIDOTI Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The base closing commission voted Friday to keep open Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota - rejecting the Pentagon's plan to close it - as the panel labored toward conclusion of a politically delicate task that has brought alternating sighs of relief and exasperation in communities across America.
The surprise decision was a setback for Pentagon leaders, a blessing for South Dakotans who feared losing some 4,000 jobs, and a victory for Sen. John Thune and the state's other politicians who lobbied vigorously to save the base. Thune, a freshman Republican, unseated then-Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle partly on the strength of his claim he could help save the base.
As it made decisions this week on the first round of base closings in a decade, commissioners also bucked Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld by voting to keep open two major Navy bases in New England - a submarine base in Connecticut and a shipyard in Maine. Other contentious issues in the Air Force restructuring remained to be heard later Friday.
Ellsworth, most famous for its Cold War-era arsenal of missiles and nuclear bombers aimed toward the Soviet Union, is home to half the nation's fleet of B1-B bombers. The Pentagon had wanted to move all the bombers at their other location, Dyess Air Force Base in Texas.
Advertisement Click to learn more...
But the commission found that closing Ellsworth wouldn't save any money over 20 years, and that it actually would cost nearly $20 million to move the planes to the Texas base. The Pentagon had projected saving $1.8 billion over two decades with the closure.
"We have no savings, we're essentially moving the airplanes from one very, very good base to another very, very good base, which are essentially equal," commissioner Harold Gehman said about the proposal.
As the commission voted, Thune smiled as he accepted handshakes of congratulations from other lawmakers, including New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who was awaiting a decision on the proposed closure of Cannon Air Force Base in his state. Thune said the decision was not political.
"Obviously our arguments got through. The current and future value of Ellsworth Air Force base got through," he said moments after the vote.
But, overall, Colorado gains from the realignment so everybody should be happy.
If I pay taxes to help pay for this Air Force base, and with his base continuing to exist, it means Dashole has 0 chance of winning an election, then I would say my tax dollars have been well spent.
What I don't understand is saving the bases in the North East. It's all about politics and they aren't with the "IN" party up there. Move them jobs to the South!
Will Thune stop acting like a little girl now?
Same here I can still remember how the Fraud, Waste and Abuse hot-line number had to posted prominently in every facility. Now we have the Air Force saying we don't need Ellsworth and that its mission can be absorbed into another base saving taxpayers billions of dollars. Then this panel solely for political reasons chooses to keep it open and conservatives cheer. I thought we were the party of small government that stood against wasteful pork barrel spending.
If your watching C-Span, please keep us on the thread updated and Ping me when they make a decision on Cannon. I have to get some work done.
I thought the world of Thune and supported him to unseat Daschle. But, when he came out against Bolton because they were thinking of closing the base, he really turned me off.
Looks like you're saved. Now you don't have to pack up and move next year. That's one less pain in the a** to deal with.
Commission Votes to Save Ellsworth Air Force Base
There's also this chart:
Nobody else seems to have commented yet on this: Is it a bit scary that the Pentagon said it would save $1.8 BILLION dollars over 20 years, and the panel then looked at the same data and said it would actually COST $20 million?
That's a pretty big difference of opinion on what should be pretty good data to evaluate.
What does that say about other efforts by the Pentagon to evaluate cost savings?
You are wrong about keeping the base open for political purposes. The DOD did not have all the facts when putting Ellsworth on the closing list. If you had listened to C-Span this morning, you would have heard how it would cost MORE money to close the base and send the planes to Dyess AFB in Texas than leave them at Ellsworth.
But the commission found that closing Ellsworth wouldn't save any money over 20 years, and that it actually would cost nearly $20 million to move the planes to the Texas base. The Pentagon had projected saving $1.8 billion over two decades with the closure.
I'd trust the Pentagon's numbers, they are not politically motivated. The panel knew what their marching orders were going in and they cooked the numbers to back their position. The Pentagon goes through a very thorough process based on needs of the military to come up with their recommendations. It gets screwed up when civilians get their hands on it and they use the list as political bargaining chips. That's why we waste money maintaining old installations whose only purpose is to provide a source of income for the community. It's another form of big government welfare spending.
That's the other trick to BRAC. Even the final list isn't final. When they show up to close the base they do a real evaluation of costs to shut it down. They then find a bunch of ordinance buried in the ground and declare it will cost more to clean it up than it would save by closing it. So Ft. Monroe may still have a chance. They better start hiding some ammo in the ground.
Closing military bases seems to bring the "socialist" in people you would not expected.. were socialists.. Down sizing the federal gov't is almost ALWAYS a good thing.. Same thing with Social Security.. and the Federal Education "Business"..
Hoping that the good luck spills over to Cannon. Unfettered air space for training, excellent weather, no urban encroachment -- those are the military reasons to keep it open. Economic-wise, Clovis would lose 1/3 of its jobs and just become another dusty west Texas town. Further down the road, water will be an issue for farming due to dewatering of the local aquifer for irrigation.
See my post #34 for the things the Military tries. They know they have to give up something so they chose some bases that they know will cost way too much to close. And then declare they didn't know of Chemical X or Ammo Y buried there.
I prepared the post and checked the screen one last time and then hit "Post". Was just seconds ahead of Pukin Dog (first time for that!!). First post is the one that sticks.
In principle I agree with you; however in practice SS is a great thing (but could use some tweaks). What would happen if we didn't have forced savings via SS? Do you think the sheeple would stand by and let millions of old folks eat cat food on the nightly news? You know they'd just vote to buy them real food and give them a home. And who'd pay for that? We would. So at least SS gives a minimum level of subsistanance that helps prevent them from going on tv eating cat food and sleeping on the street.
It's be nice to say, sorry you screwed up and spent every dime you ever made on cigs and beer, but that would never fly with most of the people.
Thune Rides Again in 2010.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.