BRAC FACTS: SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT
The FY18 NDAA, which does not authorize a BRAC round, passed through Committee with an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 60 to 1.
No one believes that the current military force structure is adequate to meet the threats we face. In fact, senior commanders continually testify that our military is too small. Assessing our capacity based on an inadequate force structure makes no sense.
- More than any other time in our history, rapidly evolving warfighter capabilities such as cyber offense/defense, hypersonic weapons, 5th generation stealth, directed energy, and many others demand a synergistic and responsive infrastructure.
- Once you give up a base or capability, you may never get it back or it is incredibly expensive to replace.
WHAT THEY’RE SAYING
HASC Hearing June 2017: Secretary Mattis does not have confidence in DOD BRAC assessments, wants to review the data on excess capacity
“I am not comfortable right now that we have a full 20 some percent excess. I need to go back through and look at this again because I don't want to, you know, get rid of something or come to you with something that we can't sustain and then we try to say we got to buy some land here in 10 years.”
REP. JOE WILSON (R-SC): "The last BRAC cost 60% more than estimated…”
REP. ROB BISHOP (R-UT): “It takes money off defense rolls…but does the taxpayer save money? We are shifting the money around…but the taxpayer is still on the hook.”
REP. BILL SHUSTER (R-PA): "When you close a depot or base, you can't snap your fingers and bring it back - and that leaves us vulnerable if we don't have what we need to meet new threats."
CHAIRMAN MAC THORNBERRY (R-TX): “I am interested in real, updated, data-driven study of our excess infrastructure…”