Base closings, 'Buy American' disputes lie ahead in defense debates

As the House and Senate both take their fiscal 2005 defense authorization bills to the floor this week, controversy surrounding military base closings, the Pentagon's Boeing 767 tanker proposal and so-called "Buy American" provisions will likely stir heated debate.

Last week, the House Armed Services Committee approved a two-year delay in the upcoming base realignment and closure round, and Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., is expected to offer an amendment on the floor Wednesday or Thursday that would kill the process entirely.

But bipartisan opposition to even a delay is growing, with Rep. Mark Kennedy, R-Minn., saying he would offer an amendment to restore the Pentagon's base closing plan, and Reps. Vic Snyder, D-Ark., and John McHugh, R-N.Y., also expressing concern about a delay.

The Senate version of the bill supports a 2005 base closing round and is not likely to accede to the House committee's position if the delay makes it to conference.

But some Senate base closing opponents are emerging. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, last week expressed support for the House provision, noting in a statement that "the current BRAC process is flawed."

But Collins, an Armed Services Committee member, admitted any effort to delay the next base closing round faces an uphill battle in the Senate, where Armed Services Chairman Warner, ranking member Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., favor a new round.

Other anti-BRAC senators could emerge in the floor debate, including Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who last year garnered more than 40 votes in support of an amendment to cancel the 2005 round.

Both chambers also likely will wrestle with the issue of industrial base protections. Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn., is considering a "Buy American" amendment to the Senate bill to address domestic-source requirements for U.S. weapons and other defense technologies.

Dayton also may take aim at two provisions added to the Armed Services Committee's bill by McCain that would codify the Pentagon's authority to trade freely with U.S. allies and a third to study the effect of foreign trade on the defense industrial base.

Meanwhile, House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., included language in his bill to limit the Pentagon's ability to buy defense articles and services from foreign companies whose governments require stiff industrial compensation -- such as co-production or arms transfers -- to offset the cost of purchasing similar goods from U.S. contractors.

The House and Senate also are at odds on the Pentagon's plan to acquire Boeing 767 tankers. The Senate language would fund some efforts to modernize the Air Force's aging fleet of KC-135 tankers, while the House language asserts the KC-135s are not worth the trouble.

Instead, Hunter's bill includes money and language intended to breathe new life into the Boeing 767 plan, which has been stalled since a number of probes into the deal were initiated late last year.