Cutbacks in U.S. military failed to deliver promised savings

Image 1 of / 3 Caption Close Cutbacks in U.S. military failed to deliver promised savings 1 / 3 Back to Gallery

WASHINGTON – The largest overhaul of the U.S. military base structure in history disrupted countless lives and jobs across Texas and the nation but failed to bring the multibillion-dollar savings promised by the White House, the Pentagon and Congress.

Changes imposed by the 2005 Defense Base Realignment and Closure Commission at 29 Texas installations and 800 other locations worldwide yielded no more than $9.9 billion in one-time savings - a fraction of the $35.6 billion forecast in 2005, according to Congress' watchdog Government Accountability Office.

The supposed savings "are always overblown and the true costs associated with closing a base, cleaning up the environmental damage and re-establishing the lost capability at another post are often grossly underestimated," said Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Republican veteran of countless base-cutting campaigns since entering the Senate in 1993.

BRAC's plan relocated 125,000 people, including tens of thousands of troops, family members and civilian personnel, into or out of Texas and resulted in 24 major closings nationwide, far-reaching realignments of personnel and missions at 24 other installations and lesser changes at hundreds of other facilities.

"It is true that once again BRAC has cost more to implement and produced savings more slowly than hoped or expected," said Michael O'Hanlon, a defense expert at the Brookings Institution.

16 bases closed in Texas

Cost overruns are being blamed on oversights, increased construction costs and demands for additional space.

The high costs and limited savings "clearly show the need for greater transparency and accuracy in the base closure process," said Congressman Gene Green, a Houston Democrat who laments a complex process that cost Houston its F-16s at Ellington Field.

In Texas, the commission closed 16 facilities, including the Air Force's Brooks City Base in San Antonio.

Six other Texas installations suffered reductions in active-duty military and civilian personnel, led by Lackland Air Force Base, also in San Antonio.

Seven other facilities gained more than 22,000 military and civilian personnel, led by Fort Bliss near El Paso and Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio. Houston's Ellington Field lost a Texas Air National Guard fighter wing with 17 F-16s to become a joint reserve base serving nearly 4,000 full- and part-time personnel.

"Once you break out the checkbook, requirements start mounting from officials with unrestrained appetites," said Todd Harrison, a senior fellow at the independent Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

Overlooked requirements and mid-project add-ons jacked up the costs of implementation across Texas by 59 percent to $4.3 billion, GAO figures showed.

$953 million overrun

Savings "have not materialized as planned," laments Rep. Pete Olson. But the Sugar Land Republican sees benefits for Ellington Field, in his district, being forced to become a multi-service reserve base and home of a reconnaissance wing operating three Predator drones overseas.

Glaring mistakes establishing the San Antonio Regional Medical Center and consolidating enlisted medical training at Fort Sam Houston illustrate the wider problem.

Officials blew past initial implementation costs of $1 billion with a $953 million cost overrun attributed largely to "identification of additional requirements," the GAO said.

Taxpayers shouldered another $283 million cost overrun to close the Air Force's Brooks City Base in San Antonio and reassign military functions to four other bases, including Fort Sam Houston. The initial price tag of $325 million swelled 87 percent in part because the Army took into account only Army requirements for facilities and left out the needs of both the Navy and Air Force at Fort Sam Houston, the GAO told Congress.

Election-year forecast

Even the realignment at Fort Hood that moved key combat units to Fort Bliss and Fort Carson, Colo., cost taxpayers $185 million more than expected.

The increase largely stems from decisions chiefly by the Army to "expand the originally envisioned scope of construction," said Robyn, a former White House official in the Clinton administration.

Disappointment with cutbacks launched during the presidency of George W. Bush make it unlikely that an election-year Congress will approve the Obama administration's request for two more rounds of base cuts in coming years as part of the latest Pentagon budget proposal.

"There is no evidence that another BRAC would save taxpayers money or make America more secure," said Sen. John Cornyn, R-San Antonio, a member of the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee who opposes another round of base closings. "The Pentagon has a lot of work to do getting its financial house in order."

stewart.powell@chron.com