mr. chairman , i yield myself such time as i may consume . 
mr. chairman , i rise to join chairman hunter and ranking member skelton in opposing house joint resolution 65 . 
i was not a fan of us doing this brac round . 
the gentleman from illinois said that if 9/11 had happened before the approval of this round , we probably would not have had a brac round . 
but the truth is that we have reaffirmed this brac round time and time again since 9/11 . 
each year i would offer an amendment in the armed services committee to put off the brac for many of the reasons that the gentleman from illinois has stated : to put off the brac for 2 years until we could see where we are about bringing troops home , to see where we are on our war against terror . 
each time it would pass overwhelmingly in committee , it would pass overwhelmingly in this house , and we would be shot down in the conference committee by the senate and the white house . 
we lost that battle . 
that would have been my choice . 
but once we have gone through this process , i think we should proceed with it at this point . 
just 5 months ago , the house voted down an amendment that would have delayed brac , the 2005 brac , indefinitely . 
i argued then , as i do today , that we must allow the brac process at this point to run its course . 
as it turned out , that course took several unexpected twists and turns along the way . 
on the positive side , the brac commission removed several significant bases from the closure list . 
in doing so , they validated our belief that our military should not give up the ability to surge to meet future crises in times of war and peace , allowing this ability that is fundamental to our nation 's security . 
on the negative side , the commission 's actions on some issues like the commission 's directive relating to the naval air station oceana , for example , raise a number of questions about the credibility underlying the brac process . 
considering that credibility is the foundation upon which brac is built , such questions are troubling . 
while i do not believe the brac 2005 outcome to be sufficiently flawed to vote to disapprove it , i have reached the conclusion that any future use of the existing brac laws to close or realign bases would be a mistake . 
in balance , mr. chairman , i feel that this may have been the best brac process that we have had in all of the brac processes we have had . 
there are problems with it . 
it has never been perfect . 
it was not perfect this time . 
but i think it was perhaps the smoothest and best process that we have had . 
to those of my colleagues who still may be on the fence about today 's vote , i would point out that disapproval of the brac 2005 recommendations would guarantee yet another round of base closures in the very near future . 
bases on today 's closure list would likely appear again on the future list . 
and those bases that escaped closure this time would again be at risk of closure or realignment . 
whether or not you support any given closure or realignment within brac 2005 , i hope that all of my colleagues will recognize that the alternative , which is another round of brac in the near future , would be even worse . 
my friends , i do not want to go through this again . 
any of us who represent bases across this nation do not want to continually go through this kind of agony . 
for all of these reasons , i will vote against h. j. res. 65 and vote to allow the brac process to run its course . 
mr. chairman , i reserve the balance of my time . 
