Evolution of the Basic Closure Process: The Struggle to Keep 'The Sticky Fingers of Politics' Out

Few public policy decisions rival the degree of angst created by military base closures. Among advocates and critics alike, the mere mention of the acronym "BRAC" evokes vehement reactions on Capitol Hill, just as it does in the White House, the Pentagon and civilian locales near military installations. This paper will examine the unique evolution of the controversial, but essential, decision process behind military base closures. In the book, Essence of Decision, Graham Allison proposes three models for analyzing the decision-making process: the rational actor, organizational behavior and government-bureaucratic politics. A fourth model, that of psychology, is also instructive in that it considers the influence of uncertainty, ambition and values in decision-making dynamics. The evolution of the base realignment and closure (BRAC) process is a paragon of how rational, organizational, political and psychological factors are deeply embedded within public policy decisions. Precisely because sizing and shaping of military force structure and infrastructure have profound implications for myriad stakeholders, what should be a rational decision in the context of broad national security interests is anything but.