[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 64 (Thursday, May 15, 1997)]
[House]
[Page H2686]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1045
                ADMINISTRATION'S ROLE IN BRAC QUESTIONED

  (Mr. LUCAS of Oklahoma asked and was given permission to address the 
House for 1 minute.)
  Mr. LUCAS of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I met with a number of National 
Guard members yesterday and we discussed their crucial role in our 
Nation's military. I find it slightly ironic that their visit coincided 
with news from the Pentagon that the administration is going to propose 
that we initiate another round of base closings.
  I cannot help but make the connection that if the President had not 
circumvented the last round of base closings, the level of cuts that is 
being proposed would be unnecessary. If the reports are true, the 
administration will be asking the individual branches, including the 
National Guard, to substantially reduce their numbers, all to save 
money that could have been saved if BRAC had been followed by the 
President.
  The purpose of a BRAC is to depoliticize the process and allow 
objective outsiders to recommend which bases should be closed based on 
a number of objective criteria. This process worked well until the 
President signed the bill, then ordered something quite different.
  Another BRAC? Why does the President not start by respecting the 
decisions forwarded by the last BRAC?

                          ____________________