[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 112 (Friday, August 3, 2001)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1532]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        ON THE INTRODUCTION OF THE ``MX MISSILE STAND-DOWN ACT''

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. EDWARD J. MARKEY

                            of massachusetts

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, August 2, 2001

  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, today, Rep. Tauscher and I are introducing 
the ``MX Missile Stand-Down Act'', a measure to take the 50 MX missiles 
off of hair-trigger alert.
  Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld announced on June 27 of this 
year that the Pentagon would seek to dismantle these 50 MX missiles. 
Yesterday, the House Armed Services Committee passed by voice vote an 
amendment by Rep. Allen to the Defense Authorization bill to allow such 
dismantlement, which had been previously prohibited by Congress.
  The bill we are introducing today augments these recent steps. 
According to a preliminary plan by the Air Force, these MX missiles 
would be dismantled over a 3-year timescale. What our legislation is 
saying is that there is no need to keep the balance of the silo-
busting, heavily-MIRVed MX missiles in a state of ready launch during 
that time, and therefore we direct the Secretary of Defense to stand-
down the MX missiles by removing their warheads over FY2002.
  This is a simple but important step. Currently, the United States and 
Russia have a total of about 4,000 weapons on hair-trigger alert, ready 
to launch within a few minutes. This state of readiness is unnecessary 
a decade after the end of the Cold War. As then-Governor George W. Bush 
observed during the recent Presidential campaign on May 23, 2000, 
``[T]he United States should remove as many weapons as possible from 
high-alert, hair-trigger status. Another unnecessary vestige of Cold 
War confrontation, preparation for quick launch within minutes after 
warning of an attack was the rule during the era of superpower rivalry. 
But today for two nations at peace, keeping so many weapons on high 
alert may create unacceptable risks of accidental or unauthorized 
launch.''
  There is a real danger that a false alarm could lead to a nuclear 
exchange, as evidenced by episodes such as the 1995 incident in which 
the Russians mistook a scientific launch for an attack and began the 
process of responding. With the Russian early warning systems having 
deteriorated since that incident, the hazard is all the more plausible. 
Therefore, we also direct the Secretary of Defense to make yearly 
reports to Congress on the condition of the Russian early warning 
systems, as well as the inventory and alert status of the Russian 
nuclear arsenal.
  This bill continues the process of confidence-building, making a 
definitive, material statement to the Russians that we do not wish to 
continue to maintain our nuclear weapons in high-alert and thereby 
encourage them to follow suit.

                          ____________________