Maine has been hit by a “tsunami.”

On Friday, the Pentagon released its list of military bases that it would like to close or realign. Maine was particularly hard hit. Portsmouth Naval Shipyard and its 4,500 jobs are targeted for elimination. Brunswick Naval Air Station is slated for realignment, meaning it will lose another 2,420 jobs. And a defense department accounting office in Limestone – part of efforts to redevelop the former Loring Air Force base, which had been felled by an earlier round of base closure – will close, costing 240 jobs.

In total, Maine bears a disproportionate share of the pain in the Pentagon’s cold calculus of which bases live and which ones die. Only Connecticut faces more lost jobs than Maine, 8,586 to 6,938. And only the District of Columbia and Alaska lost a larger number of jobs per capita.

Two weeks ago, the chairman of the commission that will evaluate Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s wish list of base closures said the decisions would be “tsunamis in the communities they hit.”

He wasn’t kidding.

The implications of almost 7,000 lost jobs will be felt across the entire state and in every sector of the economy. Fewer cars will be sold, stores will lose customers, schools will lose students. To put things in perspective, imagine if every elementary school teacher in the state suddenly lost his or her job. The numbers are similar. In 2002, there were 6,444 elementary teachers in the state.

Maine’s congressional delegation fought tooth and nail to stave off a decision by the Navy that could have forced Bath Iron Works to close. BIW employees about 6,200 workers. Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins found themselves casting tough votes in favor of a deeply flawed budget resolution in hopes of protecting the shipyard. While those efforts have been at least temporarily successful, the base closures represent a new struggle to save jobs.

The fight’s just getting started.

Maine’s politicians reacted swiftly and unanimously to word that Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Brunswick Naval Air Station and a military accounting office in Limestone were on the list for closure or major reductions. Gov. Baldacci, Reps. Tom Allen and Mike Michaud, along with Snowe and Collins, have vowed to resist the list and will work with lawmakers from New Hampshire to undo the damage.

Their passion was undeniable, their words strong, the commitment complete. But all those qualities were replicated across the country as members of Congress sprang to the defense of bases in their state. With every state looking out for its own interests, it becomes more difficult to build a coalition with the clout to oppose a determined secretary of defense.

The recommendations from Rumsfeld aren’t a done deal. The list must be approved by a federal base closing commission. It then goes to the president and Congress, which can either approve or deny the request but can’t make changes to it. Historically, the commission approves about 85 percent of the Pentagon’s recommendations after visiting the bases in question and allowing for public comment.

Every community touched by Rumsfeld’s tsunami will try to protect its bases. The lobbying will be intense, and different states and regions will be pitted against one another.

The motivation behind the cuts is suspect. At a time when the United States has troops deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq and in the war on terror, it doesn’t make sense to reduce capacity. Rumsfeld predicts the closures will save $48 billion over 20 years. We’re skeptical. Previous rounds of base closures have not lived up to expectations for savings. Considering the country is spending a small fortune each day in Iraq, while throwing money at inoperable programs like missile defense, we doubt that fiscal austerity is driving the Department of Defense.

There’s no reason for Maine to accept the closures as a done deal, but the state must be realistic about its chances for success. Planning should begin immediately on how best to deal with the worst-case scenario.