CONGRESS BACKING BASES; CLOSURES RUN INTO ROADBLOCK.

Byline: Jim Skeen Daily News Staff Writer

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Rep. Bob Stump, R-Ariz., are miles apart ideologically, but when the subject turns to base closures they sound like they are on the same page.

``We haven't saved one nickel,'' Stump said of previous closures. ``This House, this Congress is not going to listen to them.''

Boxer points out that military units must be relocated from a closed base and new facilities built elsewhere, digging into the projected savings from a closure.

``They have not met expectations in terms of dollars saved,'' Boxer said.

The Clinton administration call for two more rounds of base closures is running into a solid wall of bipartisan opposition.

Unless Defense Secretary William Cohen can find a more persuasive argument or a way to apply more heat, this Congress and quite possibly the next will not approve more base closures, representatives said.

Tim Ransdell, executive director of the California Institute for Federal Policy Research, a nonprofit organization that assists the California congressional delegation, said he does not expect the issue to be taken up until after the presidential election in 2000.

Cohen is taking his arguments for more base closures to the public, making the rounds on the news talk show circuit and writing opinion pieces for newspapers. Among Cohen's arguments is that without the base closures he will begin pulling jobs and units away from bases he selects on his own, as the only way to meet the military's responsibilities with shrinking defense budgets.

If Congress agrees to a formal base closure process, Cohen says, the affected communities would receive some federal assistance in finding other roles for their installations.

Aerospace consultants for the city of Lancaster say something simply has to give as the defense budget shrinks but the number of bases stays the same.

In a draft of a position paper calling for consolidating test and evaluation work in the Southwest, on bases ranging from the Naval Air Weapons Station, Point Mugu, to White Sands in New Mexico, the consultants argue bases deserving to stay open are suffering from too few dollars being spread too far.

The consultants, headed by former Edwards Air Force Base official Bob Johnstone, say consolidation, done after a fair and objective analysis, is needed.

``Continuing to inadequately fund all bases when the reduced workload cannot support the existing infrastructure will force gross inefficiencies, reduce the capability to meet (Department of Defense's) war-fighting requirements, and reach the wrong long-term answer because of a series of short-term decisions,'' their paper said.

The consultants fault the previous base closure process for overlooking the advantages they say Western bases have over Eastern bases.

It didn't take into consideration such things as high-traffic commercial air lanes over sea ranges in the Atlantic, the benefits from joint use of Western ranges, and the days of clear weather for testing and training in the West, they say.

With Congress balking at base closures, any consolidations will become highly political unless some sort of system of checks and balances is installed, the consultants said.