Governor, lawmakers set to defend Hill Air Force Base from closure

Defense secretary has called for trims to defense budget

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Well Read SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Feb. 3, 2012 5:04 p.m.

    It is way past time to shut down Hill air force base! We who decry Federal control and the huge deficit we now have need to sit back, take a deep breath, wait to see what happens. To spend $500,000 to lobby to keep the base when our schools need all the money they can get is a bit silly. If we have to dig up $500,000 where will it come from?? Probably reduce educational spending. That seems to happen each year. If the base closes - it closes. We really can no do anything to stop it. There is no real reason to keep the base. It would be better for the economy of Utah if it closed. It is my opinion we in the US would be better off if thee defense budget were cut 50%. Think of the savings that could go toward cutting the deficit. We do not need the huge military defense budget we have. We do not have to be prepared to fight two or even one war all the time. We have been in so many wars since the IIWW and what has it gained us. Many dead and injured, much treasure lost that could go toward improving our standard of living.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 3, 2012 3:46 p.m.

    Herbert,

    After blasting the federal goverment, not a WEEK later, you advocate for continued funding of Hill Air Force Base?

    You should resign after such a flip flop.

  • XelaDave Salem, UT
    Feb. 3, 2012 2:16 p.m.

    Ohhh give me break Gov.- I have studied BRAC since its inception and never has there been a correlation found between red and blue states and who is in the White House- that is just typical pandering- in fact BRAC has been lauded as one of the most reasonable things Congress has done in the last 20 years- if the Gov. is honest in his statement about meaningful analysis then he should trust BRAC because its history shows it can do just that- the real critcism of BRAC is actually places like Hill- it is apparent BRAC is committed to keeping one major facility alive in all states- you can argue that is a strategic move or a political move or both but that is about the only thing you can really level criticsim on- so to all the cut waste people out there embrace BRAC even it if hurts you because they do good work and if you really claim to want waste and redundancy removed that might cost you Hill- or is this one of those not in my backyard things and waster everywhere except where it hurts me?

  • skylinestar saltlake city, utah
    Feb. 3, 2012 10:00 a.m.

    Theres more then enough with NO Jobs,Keep it open?

  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    Feb. 3, 2012 9:17 a.m.

    I think one of my posts has gotten lost in the shuffle. Let me be clear. All government spending comes out of the same bank account. That account is now over 15 trillion in the red. We must cut spending somewhere. I think we all agree. Now where to cut. Since the Johnson administration we have spent about 10 trillion on the so called Great Society in effort to end poverty. It has only brought poverty down by a few percentage points. Many of these programs are still funded and expanded. Better to spend money on productive people whether in Utah or anywhere else first than to keep spending on non-productive programs. My point is not just about HAFB. It is about the spending policy of the country as a whole. It was the article about cutting at HAFB which prompted my point. I'm looking at the macro not the micro.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    Feb. 3, 2012 8:40 a.m.

    @m.g. scott

    You are aware, I hope, that there are approximately 4200 military personnel assigned to Hill Air Force Base, most of whom are assigned to the 388th Tactical Fighter Wing. The Fighter Wing is merely a tenant of Hill Air Force Base and can be reassigned at any time to any base or forward fighting area at a moment's notice. A fighter wing can be expanded or eliminated at any time based on national security requirements. That is Hill's F-16, and most visible component.

    The rest of the 13,000 people who work at Hill Air Force Base are federal civilian employees. The employees work at the Ogden Air Logistics Center. These civilian employees do the dirty work of in-depth maintenance of aircraft and support equipment. These employees are not military, but the dreaded General Schedule (GS) and Wage Grade (WG) employees and are highly unionized. They are hard-working employees who do an amazing job keeping C-130 Hercules and A-10 Thunderbolt aircraft flying, as well as maintenance of other systems like landing gear, missile repair, etc. These are the employees that Utahns have a love/hate relationship with. The fact that they are GS and WG employees causes a stick in the craw, but because they work for DoD, they are tolerated by Utahns. Oh yeah, there are also 4000 civilian contractors working at Hill.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Feb. 3, 2012 8:04 a.m.

    @ m.g. scott , you give a knee-jerk response. Mine is not an anti-military argument. And the GOP has fought against increasing veteran's benefits. I am personally familiar with the GOP stripping Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) of his chairmanship because he persisted in fighting for proper treatment of veterans of the second Iraq war. This is not an isolated example. But beyond that, this is not an argument about so-called entitlements. It is about federal spending in Utah. If the military decides that money is better spent elsewhere, Utahns who scream for less spending should stand up and say OK rather than keep pursuing their hypocritical pork barrel approach. You can't expect everyone else to cut except you. Frankly, your argument proves my point.

  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    Feb. 3, 2012 7:34 a.m.

    Re: Esquire
    However,
    Isn't it interesting that the Democrats will never consider reducing the freebee and goodies programs they use to hold onto peoples dependence upon them for the vote. I'd much rather give federal money to people who get educations, serve in the military to defend the country, and provide some substantive purpose to life. It's the entitlement spending that needs to be cut. At least the military are pulling the handcart, not just sitting in it.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Feb. 3, 2012 6:48 a.m.

    Oh, one other thing. I have to wonder if putting all your eggs in the GOP basket might hurt when decisions are made that directly impact Utah. A more balanced representation in Congress and in the way Utah votes seems to be more in our interests than in being a one party state, where the GOP takes you for granted and the Dems owe you nothing.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Feb. 3, 2012 6:46 a.m.

    So now federal spending is good. There are thousands of jobs, direct and indirect, due to government spending. It turns all the Republican arguments on their head, doesn't it?

  • My2Cents Taylorsville, UT
    Feb. 3, 2012 5:54 a.m.

    I doubt that there is very little these tax funded agents of the state can do in defending HAFB or any federal jobs in Utah.

    First, the Military could care less about local economy or state and the economy is irrelevant. This states commission doesn't have a clue what federal agency's do or how well they do serve the government and the United States. This commission is a bunch of high paid CEO beggars standing around with their tin cups begging for a shekel and underpaid jobs.

    The saving grace of HAFB is its workers, the one asset Utah considers irrelevant in jobs or securing industry. Their experience, skills, and devoted American workers to job, regardless of education, give HAFB something the state can't give the federal government, security, pride, American culture, and belief in their serving this country.

    The people of HAFB, all american citizens, and the many diverse services that HAFB offers many of the military branches to train and fulfill the missions of our Nations soldiers.

    The major downfall of HAFB is lack of state security from foreign nationals surrounding and attempting to breach the defenses of HAFB, and blocked base expansion.