[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 74 (Tuesday, May 2, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1450-S1451]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                         Nuclear Revitalization

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today I would like to talk about nuclear 
revitalization for a few minutes.
  I want to make two overarching points. First, no sane person wants a 
nuclear war. No sane person wants a nuclear war. But, No. 2, peace 
through weakness never works--never. When the United States built much 
of its nuclear stockpile, the Cold War was raging, and the Soviet Union 
was our only major adversary with a sophisticated nuclear stockpile. We 
remember those days. Our nuclear power deterred Soviet aggression and 
made sure the Cold War never escalated.
  But today, fast forward, we no longer face just one threat. Russia 
still maintains the world's largest nuclear arsenal, but China's 
nuclear stockpile is growing rapidly. North Korea, as we know, 
continues to threaten our allies with its collection of nuclear 
weapons. And thanks to the disastrous nuclear deal with Iran, Iran is 
marching ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon of its own.
  So here is where the United States finds itself today. The United 
States must now counter nuclear superpowers in both China and Russia 
while also deterring the itchy trigger fingers of unstable dictators 
like Kim Jong Un and the Ayatollah in Iran.
  We should be innovating and preparing our nuclear arsenal for this 
new global dynamic. But, instead, our nuclear stockpile remains stuck 
in the Cold War, and that is just a fact. Put simply: America's nuclear 
stockpile is old, and it is shrinking. And while modernizing our 
nuclear arsenal should be a top priority, our effort to restart nuclear 
weapon production has been riddled with delays and poor planning and we 
do not have time to waste.
  The United States has not built a single nuclear warhead since the 
close of the Cold War. Let me say that again. The United States has not 
built a single nuclear warhead since the close of the Cold War. 
Instead, we have focused on what we call Life Extension Programs to 
keep our old weapons operational by refurbishing them. Those that 
aren't refurbished are destroyed.
  From 1994 until 2020, the United States dismantled 11,683 total 
nuclear warheads. And this total does not include the 2,000 other 
warheads that have been retired while awaiting their own demolition as 
well. Most of our nuclear warheads are decades old. The facilities 
where we built and store these are even older. As recently as 2019, the 
computer system controlling our nuclear weapons ran on floppy disks. I 
kid you not.
  Today, we are so far behind in our nuclear revitalization that we 
cannot even produce plutonium pits. Plutonium pits are an essential 
component of every nuclear weapon. Plutonium pits sit at the center of 
a warhead. They are not all that different from pits in a peach. The 
pit is essential because it triggers the nuclear explosion. Plutonium 
pits do not last forever. They can only sit inside a weapon for roughly 
100 years before we must replace them. The clock is ticking on our Cold 
War-era weapons.
  During the Cold War, the United States produced more than 1,000 
plutonium pits per year. And without plutonium pits, you can't have a 
nuclear weapon. But the United States has not regularly manufactured 
plutonium pits since 1989. In fact, the United States has not produced 
a single warhead-ready plutonium pit since 2012. As you would imagine, 
our nuclear engineers cannot just stop by the hardware store to pick 
these up. It doesn't work that way. Pit production is a very complex, a 
very expensive, and a very time-consuming process.
  But our adversaries haven't stopped. Our adversaries certainly 
haven't stopped. China, Russia, North Korea, Pakistan all continue to 
produce plutonium pits to ready their arsenals. Yet the U.S.A. fell 
asleep at the wheel and let our plutonium pit production die off almost 
entirely.
  Keeping our nuclear arsenal in shape is sort of like keeping your 
body in shape. If you stop exercising all together, it will be very 
painful when you start it again. The United States is learning this the 
hard way.
  In 2014, the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense 
determined that it would need at least 4,000 new plutonium pits--4,000, 
not 40, not 400, 4,000 new plutonium pits--to replace the aging pits in 
our current weapons as part of our larger refurbishment strategy. New 
pits are also needed for any new weapons that we choose to build.
  Department officials determined that the United States would need to 
produce a minimum of 80 plutonium pits per year by 2030 to be able to 
reach our national security goals by 2080. To meet this goal, Congress 
passed a bill, and in that bill, we instructed the National Nuclear 
Security Administration--we call it the NNSA--to resume plutonium pit 
production in two separate facilities in 2015. Congress tasked the Los 
Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico with a goal of 30 pits per 
year, and we tasked the Savannah River Site in North Carolina with the 
remaining 50 to achieve the 80-plutonium-pits-per-year capacity.
  But that hasn't happened. I meant it when I said we fell asleep. That 
hasn't happened. Pit production has been postponed and postponed and 
postponed.
  Most recently, NNSA Administrator Jill Hruby estimated the United 
States will hit its production goal sometime in 2036, 6 years later 
than projected. The delays are so significant--so significant--that in 
2021, the commander of the U.S. Strategic Command testified before 
Congress that no amount of funding--no amount of money--would have been 
enough to get the NNSA to its production capacity goal by 2030. That is 
what happens when you fall asleep. That is what happens when you stop 
exercising.

  These new pits are not just nice to have; they are essential for 
developing new weapons to deter aggression from hostile nations. 
Consider what our military calls the W87-1 Modification Program. Under 
this program, the United States is developing--or trying to develop--a 
new warhead that would ride atop the next generation of ICBMs. And an 
ICBM, of course, is an intercontinental ballistic missile.
  But these new weapons cannot run on old plutonium pits; they require 
a new design. The delayed pit production means that these warheads and 
our ability to deter China's growing arsenal is delayed as well.
  Now, I understand that plutonium pit production is not simple. And 
like many other workplaces in our wonderful country, supply chain 
issues and a shortage of qualified workers created unexpected problems 
for our capacity goals. I get that. But there is a difference--there is 
a stark difference--between encountering unexpected challenges and 
simply failing to prepare, and investigations show the NNSA has not 
taken its preparation seriously enough.
  The Government Accountability Office, one of our watchdogs, 
determined that the NNSA lacked both a comprehensive schedule and a 
cost estimate for its plutonium projects. Importantly, the NNSA also 
lacked an integrative master schedule that can be used to coordinate 
everything from production to staff. Administration officials recently 
announced better, more concrete schedules and cost estimates, but that 
cannot make up for the valuable time we have already wasted. It can't. 
And concerningly, the NNSA remains on the Government Accountability 
Office's list of organizations that are at high risk for ``fraud, 
waste, abuse and mismanagement'' because of its practices.
  It gives me no joy to point these things out.
  Modernizing our nuclear stockpile is essential for maintaining our 
national security and affirming our position as a global leader. Our 
weapons don't only protect Americans--we know that. They protect our 
allies. As part of our extended deterrent strategy, we have agreed to 
help defend our allies who don't have nuclear weapons of their own, in 
large part to deter them from getting nuclear weapons.
  But our allies aren't stupid. They see our antiquated stockpile, and 
they

[[Page S1451]]

wonder if we can follow through on our promise to protect them if they 
themselves do not acquire nuclear weapons. Take our friends in South 
Korea. They announced their doubts earlier this year. South Korea has 
considered developing its own weapons because its leaders do not know 
if America's arsenal is ready to answer the call if, God forbid, South 
Korea ever faces an imminent nuclear threat.
  Now, our friends in South Korea--and they are dear friends--they are 
not going to say that in stark terms, but we know from our diplomatic 
relations that is how they feel. The good news is that after some 
recent negotiations, our friends in South Korea--our ally, South 
Korea--reaffirmed its commitment to work with the United States.
  But this situation, I bring it up because it showcases the severity 
of our problem. The people of South Korea are our friends. They are our 
allies. They embrace democracy as we do. But if they are doubting our 
capabilities, our adversaries are, too. You can bet on that. Look no 
further than China.
  Now I don't hate China. I don't hate the Chinese people. They are 
wonderful human beings with souls like all of us, and they have the 
right to freedom and self-determination. I don't want a Cold War with 
China. I don't want a hot war with China. But according to the 
Pentagon, China already has more intercontinental ballistic missiles 
than the United States.
  In 2001, China had 400 nuclear warheads. At the rate it is growing, 
by 2035, China will have 1,500--far outpacing--far outpacing--the 
Pentagon's initial projections.
  China is also rapidly innovating. The Chinese military has been 
testing nuclear-capable hypersonic missiles. These nuclear-capable 
hypersonic missiles can fly five times the speed of sound. That is 
roughly 3,800 miles an hour. A few weapons that China is also testing 
could leave its intended target only minutes to respond.
  The United States of America cannot continue inching along while 
China quadruples its arsenal with newer and faster nuclear weapons.
  The days when we could neglect our nuclear stockpile without risking 
our national security are over. Our ability to deter unstable nuclear 
powers and maintain a peaceful world relies on our ability to continue 
innovating in ways only freedom-loving Americans can. But these vital 
projects rely on our plutonium pit production, and failing to produce 
pits at full capacity is just not acceptable.

  As the ranking member on the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy 
and Water Development, I know we will continue our focus on this issue. 
As we modernize, we must modernize our nuclear stockpile for the peace 
and safety of generations to come, and I urge my colleagues to make it 
a priority as well.
  We cannot fix this problem overnight. We didn't develop this problem 
overnight. But if we continue to work in a bipartisan fashion, we can 
restore our stockpile.
  We must restore our stockpile. It is time for the United States to 
get serious about revitalizing its nuclear arsenal so that we can 
continue to have the most reliable and sophisticated defense systems on 
the planet.
  Why is that important? Let me end as I began: because peace through 
weakness never works. Peace through weakness never works. Never.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.