According to a release from U.S. Senator Gary Peters, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Battle Creek may be the least expensive option for the proposed missile defense site for the East Coast, but not the preferred site. The Department of Defense said in a release, that Fort Drum in New York is the current preferred option, by a small margin, but is likely the most expensive option and has significant environmental challenges. Fort Custer is considered the least expensive option. The letter also noted that there is no plan for a new site at this time, and that the preferred location will be re-evaluated should a site be necessary in the future.

U.S. Representatives Fred Upton, Bill Huizenga, Tim Walberg, Paul Mitchell, and Jack Bergman issued a joint statement after the Department of Defense selected Fort Drum rather than Fort Custer for a missile defense Interceptor Site. Locating the missile defense Interceptor Site at Fort Custer could have brought $3.2 billion in economic impact and 1,800 jobs to the region.

The the representatives went on to state...

We always thought and were led to believe that on the merits, the Fort Custer site would be the best for the taxpayer and the defense of the country to build a new missile defense site. In fact, in the letter the Pentagon provided to the Committee on Armed Services, it makes clear that Fort Custer provided clear strategic advantages. It also states that the decision could be re-evaluated, and we would encourage them to do so.

It appears that Congressman Amash’s consistent opposition to all defense spending bills over the years was too much for the Pentagon to accept. It did not help, and now they selected New York for the new missile defense site.