[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 178 (Friday, December 9, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7035-S7036]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS

                                 ______
                                 

 SENATE RESOLUTION 633--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE ON THE PLAN 
     OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FOR 
          MODERNIZING THE NUCLEAR WEAPONS OF THE UNITED STATES

  Mr. FRANKEN (for himself, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Whitehouse, Ms. Warren, 
Mr. Markey, Mr. Merkley, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Schatz, Mr. Wyden, Mrs. 
Boxer, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Brown, and Mr. Murphy) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services:

                              S. Res. 633

       Whereas nuclear war poses the gravest risk to the national 
     security of the United States;
       Whereas, as of 2016, the United States maintains a force of 
     approximately 7,000 nuclear weapons, either active, on 
     reserve, or waiting for dismantlement;

[[Page S7036]]

       Whereas the Department of Defense and the Department of 
     Energy are planning an extensive and costly program to 
     ``modernize'' the nuclear weapons of the United States;
       Whereas there is substantial controversy over whether the 
     nuclear modernization plan goes beyond assuring that the 
     United States nuclear deterrent is safe, secure, and reliable 
     to defend the United States and allies of the United States, 
     and is instead a plan for the development of an even more 
     powerful nuclear arsenal that lacks sufficient cost analysis 
     or decisions on priorities;
       Whereas the nuclear modernization plan was launched in a 
     different budget era before the enactment of the Budget 
     Control Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-25; 125 Stat. 240), which 
     includes budget caps;
       Whereas there is widespread agreement that the United 
     States should retain a robust nuclear arsenal to deter a 
     nuclear attack on the United States or allies of the United 
     States;
       Whereas, if the nuclear modernization plan is followed, the 
     United States would face a ``modernization mountain'' of the 
     heightened expenses associated with developing and procuring 
     12 SSBN(X) nuclear submarines, as many as 100 long-range 
     strike bombers, a new nuclear-tipped cruise missile, and 642 
     intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons all 
     at the same time;
       Whereas the total cost to develop, procure, and maintain 
     such an enhanced nuclear arsenal over the next 3 decades has 
     been estimated at up to $1,000,000,000,000;
       Whereas, if all those nuclear weapons programs move forward 
     at their estimated cost, other priorities may suffer, 
     including the fight against international terrorism, the 
     purchase of conventional weapons, and training and 
     maintenance of troops;
       Whereas a 2014 review by the National Defense Panel, led by 
     former Secretary of Defense William Perry and retired United 
     States Army General John Abizaid, concluded, 
     ``Recapitalization of all three legs of the nuclear Triad 
     with associated weapons could cost between $600 billion and 
     $1 trillion over a thirty year period, the costs of which 
     would likely come at the expense of needed improvements in 
     conventional forces.'';
       Whereas Brian McKeon, the Principal Deputy Under Secretary 
     of Defense for Policy, noted, ``We're looking at that big bow 
     wave and wondering how the heck we're going to pay for it, 
     and probably thanking our lucky stars we won't be here to 
     answer the question.'';
       Whereas Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) Mike 
     McCord expressed his concern over the costs of the nuclear 
     refurbishment program, saying, ``I don't know of a good way 
     for us to solve this issue.'', while noting that it will be a 
     major challenge for the next President;
       Whereas Todd Harrison of the Center for Strategic and 
     International Studies pointed out that with a nuclear 
     modernization bow wave facing the United States, the next 
     President ``will need to make many difficult choices to 
     rationalize long-term defense modernization plans with the 
     resources available''; and
       Whereas former Secretary of Defense Perry stated at a July 
     2016 hearing, ``I do not believe we should simply modernize 
     all systems that we built during the Cold War.'': Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the 
     President should--
       (1) take action to ensure the affordability and feasibility 
     of the plan of the Department of Defense and the Department 
     of Energy for modernizing the nuclear weapons of the United 
     States by reevaluating, and modifying accordingly, proposals 
     for programs to modernize United States nuclear weapons and 
     delivery systems for such weapons with the goal of ensuring 
     that such proposals focus on refurbishment to ensure security 
     and safety as well as efficiency of existing weapons and 
     delivery systems; and
       (2) prioritize among any programs that are planned so that 
     the United States retains a nuclear arsenal robust enough to 
     meet deterrence needs and so that such programs do not 
     jeopardize other economic investments and other security 
     expenditures appropriate to the needs of the United States in 
     the 21st century, including responses to conventional and 
     non-conventional threats.

                          ____________________