Well, it's about two hours away, but the local politicians are all cheering. I never read one word on why this was a particularly important base.
That said, I believe it is a very bad idea to reduce the number of bases much. They should be, to some degree, denuded of activity and personnel, but not actually sold off. Put into storage is the best way.
One reason for many smaller bases rather than a few bases in states like Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas (GW Bush must still be worried that the Viet Cong will strike Texas) is that, as the number of real military operations decreases, the skill and professionalism of our military will decrease. Smaller bases let everyone get a go at running a base. A large base means that one asshole Major General could ruin the careers of a lot of people, because they don't see things his way. Perhaps he is a three star (Lieutenant General) and sees "evil" in black splotches in pictures. Would you want to work for that nut? Would you constantly be able to keep your tongue as he uses mysticism to make choices on assignments? Doch, especially in the current context, putting our military in few, very large bases is a bad idea.
Doch is the word from the German that is very useful to answer questions posed in the negative. For example, Chinese and English differ on how to answer the question "You don't want sausage in your yogurt, do you?" Bharatians (people from India) might answer that with a "Yes" because they want them. English speakers would answer that with a "No" because they don't want them, as if to say "No, I don't". Chinese speakers would answer that with a "Yes" because they don't want them, as if to say "Yes, you are right, I don't want them". German speakers, although they have "Ja" for "Yes" and "Nein" for "No" have "Doch," a special word that answers questions like that without the confusion. It might be translated as "on the contrary."