From: | Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org> |
Date: | 29 Apr 2005 15:49:38 -0000 |
Reply: | cpeo-irf |
Subject: | [CPEO-IRF] Northeast-Midwest - "The Nation's Unguarded Region" |
Below is the official summary of the Northeast-Midwest Institute's April 2005 Updated Summary Report on "Base Closings and Military Presence in the Northeast-Midwest: The Nation's Unguarded Region." For the entire public version of the report, go to http://www.nemw.org/reports.htm#fedspending. It seems that everyone is trying to come up with a way to argue that they have been or will be hurt most by base closures. I find the argument that the Northeast-Midwest region is unguarded as far-fetched, and I believe that the Pentagon planners responsible for recommending base closures and realignments will too. - LS *** Summary: The Regional Imbalance in the Nation?s Military Presence The Northeast and Midwest stand out as the nation?s least guarded regions at a time when military concerns increasingly focus on homeland defense and as the U.S. Defense Department prepares to significantly reduce its installations on home soil. The 18 northeastern and midwestern states, which hold about 40 percent of the nation?s population, account for only just more than 10 percent of the active duty military personnel located in the country. The region contains densely populated metropolitan areas, critical transportation and telecommunications infrastructure, key border crossings and ports for international trade, and the resources that produce more than 40 percent of the nation?s annual economic output ? yet together the 18 states of the Northeast-Midwest contain fewer active duty military personnel than Texas alone, or the state of California. That regional imbalance in the military's national presence could grow worse if the burden for defense cutbacks in 2005 and beyond disproportionately falls on the Northeast-Midwest, as it has in past. >From 1987 to 2002, when the Defense Department carried out four rounds of base closings and realignments, the number of active duty military personnel fell by 41 percent in the Northeast-Midwest, compared to 21 percent for the South and West. For reserve and National Guard forces, the region experienced a 37 percent drop, compared to 22 percent for the rest of the country. For civilian Defense Department employees, the decline in the Northeast-Midwest was 41 percent, compared to 34 percent elsewhere. In May 2005, the Department of Defense will release recommendations for base closings and realignments designed to reduce redundancies, trim excess physical capacity, and yield major cost savings. The Defense Department estimates that its current 276 major U.S. installations exceed its infrastructure needs by 24 percent, using the 1989 ratio of personnel to physical plant. Based on the experience of base realignment and closure (BRAC) rounds in 1993 and 1995, the Defense Department anticipates that BRAC 2005 will yield a one-time savings of $3 billion to $5 billion by 2011 and then reoccurring, annual savings of $5 billion to $8 billion thereafter. Closings and realignments will affect all types of defense facilities, not just military bases. This reduction in infrastructure costs could free up funds not only for Defense Department priorities but also for tax cuts or spending by other federal agencies. Very few Northeast-Midwest states benefit disproportionately from defense spending. The Northeast-Midwest region, which is estimated to contribute 44 percent of the federal taxes, accounts for just 25 percent of Defense Department spending in the United States, compared to 41 percent of the U.S. spending by all other federal agencies, according to fiscal 2003 data. Regional inequities in overall defense spending significantly and adversely affect the return on federal tax dollar for many northeastern and midwestern states. The forthcoming base realignments and closings must be made in a way that recognizes regional inequities in defense capabilities and spending, addresses homeland defense concerns, and acknowledges that the military's presence is important to states and regions in this age of unconventional threats, especially terrorism. When it comes to homeland security, the military has only a minor presence in the vital Northeast-Midwest region, and, as the U.S. General Accounting Office has noted, the Defense Department's ?force structure is not well tailored to perform domestic military missions.? While it would make little sense to distribute military personnel throughout the county simply for the sake of geographical balance, it also would make little sense to further reduce the already small share of military personnel in the vulnerable Northeast-Midwest. -- Lenny Siegel Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 Fax: 650/961-8918 <lsiegel@cpeo.org> http://www.cpeo.org _______________________________________________ Installation_Reuse_Forum mailing list Installation_Reuse_Forum@list.cpeo.org http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/installation_reuse_forum | |
Prev by Date: Re: [CPEO-IRF] Closure and the high-tech workforce Next by Date: [CPEO-IRF] Principi predicts | |
Prev by Thread: Re: [CPEO-IRF] Closure and the high-tech workforce Next by Thread: [CPEO-IRF] Principi predicts |