Salazar stands tough against Army expansion at Pinon Canyon
John Salazar
Representative says he should have made amendment refer to just local expansion.
By PETER ROPER THE PUEBLO CHIEFTAIN
June 18, 2009 11:26 pm
After
a Denver newspaper mistakenly said Rep. John Salazar was calling a
"truce" in his opposition to the Army's expansion of the Pinon Canyon
Maneuver Site, the three-term Democrat sent out an even tougher
statement Thursday, saying he would oppose any expansion of the
training area while he serves in Congress.
The confusion came
after the House Armed Services Committee voted down an amendment from
Salazar on Tuesday that said no training areas could be expanded in the
future without explicit approval of Congress. The amendment would have
been added to the 2010 Defense Authorization Act, the massive defense
bill that spells out Pentagon programs next year.
For Salazar,
the amendment was an effort to slam the door on the Army's three-year
campaign to expand the 238,000-acre training site near Trinidad.
But
despite having a Democratic majority on the committee, Salazar's
amendment was rejected after Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., argued that it
was unnecessary, that congressional approval would be required to
expand Pinon Canyon or any other training site. Lamborn said afterward
the committee was persuaded that Salazar's amendment was redundant.
"Fortunately,
my reasoning prevailed," Lamborn said. The Colorado Springs lawmaker
supports expanding Pinon Canyon and feared that Salazar's amendment
would be yet another blow to the Army's already crippled plans for a
bigger Pinon Canyon. Gov. Bill Ritter recently signed legislation
saying the Colorado State Land Board could not sell any of its property
around Pinon Canyon to the Army.
But Salazar also declared
victory, saying the committee vote showed that Pinon Canyon could not
be expanded in the future without congressional authorization.
"No
authorization exists to expand Pinon Canyon - period," he said in a
statement Thursday. "You cannot have expansion without authorization
and funding and I will oppose any effort to get either. The fight to
permanently end expansion may be a long one, however, for as long as I
serve in Congress, I will fight any effort to advance an expansion of
Pinon Canyon."
Salazar has succeeded for two years running in
putting a ban in the federal budget on the Army spending any funds on
the expansion. He intends to repeat that ban again this year from his
position on the House Appropriations Committee.
Asked how he
lost Tuesday's vote in the Armed Services Committee after getting
approval from its chairman, Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., Salazar said he
should have made it apply to Pinon Canyon alone. He does not sit on the
armed services panel, so his amendment was offered by Rep. Sylvester
Reyes, D-Texas.
"Mr. Lamborn succeeded in making the committee
believe the amendment restated current law and other committee members
felt it was a local matter," Salazar said.
Lamborn noted the
vote on the amendment was a show of hands, not even a roll-call vote
was called because of the lop-sided majority in his favor.
The
Senate takes up its version of the defense bill next week and Sen. Mark
Udall, D-Colo., serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee. While
Udall was non-committal when asked about Salazar's amendment several
weeks ago, a spokesman said the freshman senator gave his support to
Salazar's effort in a telephone conversation Monday night and Salazar
confirmed that.
Asked whether Udall intended to offer a similar
amendment in the Senate committee, a spokesman said Udall had not yet
indicated if he would offer amendments during the Senate mark-up of the
legislation.
The Army insists it needs to add another 100,000
acres to Pinon Canyon to provide training ground for the additional
troops being assigned to Fort Carson. It has also argued that it can
solicit a land purchase or lease using previously appropriated funds,
but Salazar has made it clear he would oppose any land purchase or
lease in defiance of the moratorium.
