Defense bill delay could alter plans to fight base closures

The Senate's decision Tuesday to hold up indefinitely consideration of the fiscal 2006 defense authorization bill might move consideration of an amendment to delay military base closures until after the independent commission reviewing the Pentagon's recommendations completes its work.

If the bill is not considered until after the August recess, it might change somewhat the makeup and resolve of lawmakers supporting South Dakota Republican Sen. John Thune's language to push back base closures until the Pentagon completes several sweeping reviews and most troops return from Iraq.

Thune told reporters last week that he would prefer debating the amendment after the Base Realignment and Closure Commission finishes its analysis and recommendations, due to the White House Sept. 8. Once the moves are finalized, he said, affected members would be more mobilized than ever to delay the round.

His office reiterated those remarks Tuesday.

"Everybody is operating under the knowledge that their base may be taken off the list," said spokesman Alex Conant. "Once the list comes out, it strengthens the resolve that this is the final option."

Thune might lose some of his most ardent supporters if the commission opts to overturn recommendations to close specific installations, sources said. However, he also might gain new support from a handful of lawmakers who represent bases the commission decided to add to its list of closure and realignment considerations.

One BRAC consultant voiced skepticism that the Thune amendment would pass, whether it is debated before or after recess. Similar attempts failed this spring in the House.

"Will there be the political will to do that?" the consultant asked. "Not unless ... there is some stuff that goes on that is so egregious that the political folks say this is not how it should have been handled."

Technically, Congress could delay or otherwise alter the BRAC process at any point, even after the commission forwards its recommendations to the White House, sources said.

After less than a week of debate, the Senate put the defense bill on hold Tuesday, turning instead to consideration of a gun-liability measure despite protests from Democrats who complained that Republicans were prioritizing "special-interest" legislation over military readiness. The National Rifle Association supports the gun-liability bill.

Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., said the defense authorization would be called to the floor again in September.

Warner supported a cloture petition pushed by Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., that would have limited debate on the authorization bill and moved it to a vote by Wednesday night. When cloture failed, the Senate voted to consider immediately the gun-liability legislation.

The cloture petition fell 10 votes short of the required two-thirds majority, with Thune and six other Republicans breaking ranks, largely because of concerns that it would have prevented debate on the BRAC language and other controversial amendments.

Delaying the bill's passage beyond the recess will affect the Senate Appropriations Committee's schedule.

Appropriations Chairman Thad Cochran, R-Miss., said Tuesday he intends to stick by his plan to wait until after the defense authorization passes before marking up the defense spending bill. He added that he would be watching the calendar.

"We have to complete that bill by Sept. 30; we have to avoid a continuing resolution," Cochran said, arguing that such a scenario would severely affect Pentagon budget-planners. "It's a matter of national security."

House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman C.W. (Bill) Young, R-Fla., said pulling the defense authorization measure from the Senate floor "slows us down a bit."

But once the Senate acts "we'll conference pretty quickly," he added. "We know how to conference bills and get things moving."

Peter Cohn contributed to this report.