[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 42 (Tuesday, April 12, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H1873-H1874]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SMART SECURITY AND NUCLEAR WEAPONS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, last year the Subcommittee on Energy and
Water Development of the Committee on Appropriations bravely stood up
to the White House by rejecting the administration's request for new
nuclear weapons funding.
The White House had requested over $70 million for research on the
robust nuclear earth penetrator, also known as the ``bunker buster''
and other nuclear weapons initiatives.
The Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development of the Committee on
Appropriations zeroed out the President's nuclear weapons initiative;
and, just as importantly, they have boldly rejected all funding for the
supremely misguided bunker buster nuclear bomb, labelling it
provocative and unnecessary.
I credit the subcommittee's chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Hobson). He courageously stood up to the White House on this issue. But
President Bush did not let that stop him from once again requesting
funding for the bunker buster bomb in this year's 2006 budget proposal.
This year the President has requested $4 million to study the
feasibility of constructing the bunker buster and another $4.5 billion
for bunker buster testing in the Air Force budget. The President's
budget also notes that he may request another $14 million for the
bunker buster in fiscal year 2007.
What could the Bush administration possibly be thinking? The United
States already possesses the most sophisticated and modern military
ever created, yet sometimes it seems like President Bush and his allies
still think we are fighting the Cold War. Fortunately, there are still
many,
[[Page H1874]]
many in Congress who live with the rest of us in the 21st century.
The bunker buster's proponents claim that it is an important device
needed in the post-9/11 world to enable our military to attack cave and
hideouts with supreme precision, but we do not need a nuclear weapon to
accomplish this. The U.S. already possesses the capability to target
terrorists wherever they are hiding.
The Bush administration's repeated attempts to develop new nuclear
weapons like the bunker buster epitomizes the hypocrisy that
underscores President Bush's foreign policy. At the same time that he
seeks to prevent countries like Iran and North Korea from developing
nuclear weapons, the White House has demonstrated its own nuclear
weapons ambitions with a vigorous intensity.
We must remember that the creation of the bunker buster would violate
the nuclear non-proliferation treaty which the United States ratified
in 1972. That is why later this week I will introduce a resolution
calling on the United States to uphold its binding commitment to this
vital international treaty.
But these nuclear ambitions should not come as a surprise. In fact,
it is just the latest in a long line of instances that demonstrate the
Bush administration's petulant double standard when it comes to
interacting with the rest of the world.
Before the bunker buster came along, they rejected the Kyoto Protocol
on global warming, claiming that it would hurt the United States
economy. Before that, it was the rejection of the International
Criminal Court which President Bush opposed because it would allow
Americans who violated international laws to be tried for war crimes
just like war criminals from other countries.
The policy of rejecting international treaties is bad for the United
States. Instead of thumbing our nose in the face of international law,
America, the world's largest democracy, needs to serve as the gold
standard for global consensus and agreement. That is why I have worked
to develop a SMART Security platform for the 21st century.
SMART Security is a Sensible Multi-lateral American Response to
Terrorism. Instead of creating new nuclear weapons, SMART Security
would work to control the spread of such weapons through aggressive
diplomacy, global weapons inspections, and comprehensive non-
proliferation efforts.
We need to lead the world's nations to end the era of nuclear
weapons. We need to demonstrate that nuclear weapons will not protect
the people of the world because if these weapons are actually used
there will be nothing left to protect.
Think about the price we have paid to eliminate weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq, weapons that actually do not exist. Over 1,500
American lives lost, more than 12,000 severely wounded American
soldiers, tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed, and more than
$200 billion spent.
Should we not invest our resources in addressing genuine nuclear
threats?
Mr. Speaker, if we do not start working with the other nations in the
world, there may come a time when other nations no longer want to work
with us.
____________________