On the recordMarch 16, 1995
I oppose the amendment from the Senator from Arizona because it is premature and unnecessary. Moreover, it can have unintended effects, which might result in forcing later expenditures that would wipe out any savings he might anticipate if the amendment were to be passed. First, Mr. President, the cuts he has anticipated in his amendment are premature and could affect the final decisions of the Base Closure Commission, prejudice the living conditions and rights of the people serving on those bases now and the communities which are associated with them. That would be unfair. Second, the amendment assumes that the committees charged with authorizing and appropriating funds for military construction projects have not anticipated or are adequately providing for savings resulting from the BRAC process. That is just not the case. Mr. President, if you look at last year's conference report on military construction appropriations you will find a reduction in the President's request of some $135 million, split evenly among the services, and some taken from defense-wide programs. This was in anticipation of the fiscal year 1996 BRAC decisions, and we took a large sum because we anticipated a larger BRAC round, more closures, than actually have been recommended by the services and DOD than has in fact been recommended. Third, it is unclear why the Senator feels it unnecessary to amend this appropriations measure.
Source
govinfo.gov




