[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 102 (Friday, June 22, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1396]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  2008

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                             HON. TOM UDALL

                             of new mexico

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 20, 2007

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2641) making 
     appropriations for energy and water development and related 
     agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and 
     for other purposes:

  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, on Wednesday, this body 
debated the Energy and Water Appropriations bill for the upcoming 
fiscal year. During debate, I offered an amendment which would have 
added $192 million for the purpose of supporting and diversifying the 
core mission of our Nation's laboratories. Although my amendment did 
not pass, I remain strongly committed to the idea that a 
diversification of the mission of our labs is essential and must take 
place now if we are going to continue to face--and solve--the major 
national security challenges of the future.
  The debate of the amendment brought up several misconceptions and 
misunderstandings, and I want to take this time to reiterate the 
purpose and substance of the amendment.
  First, some said that my amendment would increase ``funding for new 
nuclear weapon development.'' This is simply not true. My amendment 
would return spending approximately to current levels--thereby not 
providing for the funding of new weapons. As I stated in my previous 
remarks, my amendment would target funding for three programs, all of 
which support securing and maintaining our Nation's existing weapons 
and the core mission of the laboratory. In fact, two of the three 
programs--the Road Runner Supercomputer and the Science Campaign--help 
ensure our current weapons supply remains safe, reliable and accurate 
through computer simulations of weapons in the place of real weapons 
testing. In the past, I have expressed great concern with the Reliable 
Replacement Warhead (RRW) program, and I continue to believe that 
numerous important questions regarding this proposal need to be 
answered before it proceeds. I doubt our need for a new weapon.
  Second, some said that my amendment could ``terminate most of the 
Nation's nonproliferation programs'' and that opposing the amendment 
would ``stop terrorists from acquiring nuclear materials.'' This is 
also not true. According to the committee report, $75 million of the 
Office of the NNSA Administrator is set aside for the Defense Nuclear 
Nonproliferation program. My amendment would have set total funding for 
the Office of the NNSA Administrator at $215 million, more than enough 
to continue to fund the nonproliferation program. Further, my amendment 
did not in any way stipulate that the funding would come from the 
nonproliferation program. It should be noted that current funding for 
the Office is $340 million. Clearly the $415 million provided in this 
bill is a substantial increase for all programs. Even if my amendment 
had been adopted, the agency still could have completed these important 
tasks.
  Third, some said that my amendment indicated that ``jobs in New 
Mexico are more important than the overall national management of these 
sensitive national security programs.'' Certainly representing the 
constituency needs of the Third Congressional District of New Mexico is 
my primary concern. And, yes, those who would lose their jobs under 
this bill--technical, academic and support jobs in which many have 
spent decades--are worried. But let me be absolutely clear about this: 
Neither I nor a single member of the Los Alamos community would for a 
moment rather protect these jobs than protect the safety and defense of 
our national security programs. The men and women who work at Los 
Alamos take great pride in their mission and service to our Nation. 
They understand the unique undertaking of the lab, and it is my honor 
to represent them.

  Mr. Chairman, on Wednesday night I held a telephone town hall with 
the community of Los Alamos on this issue. During the town hall an 
informal poll question asked whether people support a diversification 
of the lab's mission. Eighty-four percent of the respondents--over half 
of whom were employees at LANL--supported such a diversification.
  I do not believe that we must continue with a status quo mission for 
our national laboratories. Nor do I believe that creating a national 
security strategy in a policy vacuum without any regard for the needs 
of the future is the way to proceed. There is an absolute need, and, in 
fact, a great opportunity, for our national laboratories to diversify 
their missions and expand the scientific research being conducted in 
order to meet the challenges we are facing. From energy independence to 
health care to climate change modeling, we have the capacity for this 
diversification. I hope that in the coming months and years I will be 
joined by others who believe in this cause.

                          ____________________