[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 30 (Thursday, February 25, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H895-H896]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION AND APPROPRIATIONS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, in the weeks ahead, we will be dealing 
with the budget resolution and we will be dealing with defense 
authorization and appropriations.
  Already we have seen the administration unveil a budget that is not 
only unrealistic, but actually could be dangerous.
  It keeps spending for all the nuclear modernization on track over $3 
billion, and it includes funding for a long-range, standoff replacement 
cruise missile, $2.2 billion in the future year defense program, 
ultimately costing $20- to $30 billion, if not more, this to replace a 
cruise missile that the father of this device, former Secretary of 
Defense William Perry, feels is no longer relevant and has argued 
against.
  There are billions of dollars for the controversial modernization of 
each leg of the nuclear triad--the land-based missiles, submarine-based 
missiles, and the bombers--which have not been used in 65 years, have 
been unable to help us with the military challenges that we face now in 
the Middle East and are going to consume huge sums of money in this 
hopelessly redundant program.
  It is dangerous because of the cuts in the nuclear nonproliferation 
program of over $100 million. I mean, these are real threats to our 
security.
  We are battling ISIS now. They have already obtained some low-grade 
nuclear material in a facility near Mosul. We have had a few nuclear 
weapons gone missing and other nuclear materials unaccounted for or 
stolen.
  We need to have these proven programs to reduce the inventory, track 
it down, and take it out of circulation. We should be expanding them, 
not cutting them back. It continues an overall trillion-dollar spending 
that we are going to have on the nuclear programs over the course of 
the next 30 years.
  Now, these are resources that are going to be at the expense of our 
conventional weapons. As I mentioned, the nuclear triad is far more 
than we need to deter anybody in the world right now and do not help us 
with the strategic challenges that we face today.
  It is not going to prevent Russian adventurism in Ukraine or Crimea, 
but it will result in our having to cannibalize the Guard and Ready 
Reserve, the Army that will be paying the price for this.
  These are conventional forces that have paid the price for the last 
two decades of activities and are going to be needed for both 
deterrence and, God forbid, actual activity in the future. We cannot do 
all of this within the current budget horizon.
  The budget gimmicks ignore that. We have a little trust fund with the 
overseas contingency account that ignores budget realities that we are 
not going to be able to continue in perpetuity.

[[Page H896]]

  We ignore the long-term costs of budget programs for weapons, 
preferring to put that off to a future administration and future 
Congresses.
  In so doing, we are playing fast and loose with the integrity of the 
Pentagon with the resources and the materials that are necessary to 
support our troops now and in the future.
  It is not too late for this Congress to demand a spending plan, cost 
accountability, kill the new cruise missile program, and put us on a 
path of fiscal stability and sanity while we have appropriate 
priorities for the military strength and defense of our country.

                          ____________________