[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 5017-5018]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE ACT

 Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss yesterday's 
overwhelming Senate vote in favor of the National Missile Defense Act 
of 1999. I was pleased to join with many of my colleagues in support of 
this legislation that will help to ensure that the United States does 
everything it can to defend itself from the threat of limited ballistic 
missile launches, both accidental and intentional. This legislation, 
which makes it the policy of the United States to deploy an effective 
national missile defense when technologically possible, takes an 
important first step toward providing a significant defense for all 
citizens of the United States against limited ballistic missile 
attacks.
  As most of my colleagues know, today, the United States faces a 
serious, credible, and growing threat from limited ballistic missiles 
that could potentially carry nuclear, biological or chemical payloads. 
This new threat is not from Russia, our partner in many important arms 
control agreements. Instead, this threat comes from the increasing 
proliferation of ballistic missile technology. In particular, certain 
rogue states pose the greatest threat as they continue to push for--and 
make great progress in acquiring--delivery systems that directly 
threaten the United States. I do not believe that the threat from these 
rogue states, most of which have demonstrated a complete disregard for 
the well-being of their own citizens as they relentlessly pursue the 
acquisition of this ballistic missile technology, can be understated.
  Mr. President, this new and emerging ballistic missile threat from 
rogue states was dramatically highlighted by the August 1998 Taepo Dong 
I missile launch in North Korea. This North Korean missile launch 
demonstrated important aspects of intercontinental missile development. 
Most importantly, the missile included multiple stage separation and 
the use of a third stage. This use of a third stage, in particular, was 
surprising to our intelligence community. Using a third stage gives 
this missile a potential range in excess of 5,500 kilometers, thus 
effectively making the Taepo Dong I an intercontinental ballistic 
missile.
  Unfortunately, America's intelligence community did not expect the 
North Korean's to have the capability to make such a three stage 
missile. In fact, the most recent U.S. intelligence reports made prior 
to this Taepo Dong I launch claimed that no rogue state would have this 
capability for at least ten years.
  Even before the North Koreans launched their Taepo Dong I missile 
last August, there were other disturbing reports that predicted the 
eminent ballistic missile threat to the United States. In July, the 
Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States, 
known as the Rumsfeld Commission, released its report. The Rumsfeld 
Commission was a bipartisan commission headed by former Defense 
Secretary Rumsfeld and other well respected members in the defense 
community. The Rumsfeld Commission warned of the growing ballistic 
missile threat that rogue states posed to the United States. The 
Rumsfeld Commission unanimously found that, ``concerted efforts by a 
number of overtly or potentially hostile nations to acquire ballistic 
missiles with biological or nuclear payloads pose a growing threat to 
the United States, its deployed forces and its friends and allies.''
  The Commission reported further that, ``The threat to the U.S. posed 
by these emerging capabilities is broader, more mature and evolving 
more rapidly than has been reported in estimates and reports by the 
Intelligence Community.''
  The launch of the Taepo Dong I missile and the findings of the 
Rumsfeld Commission are very troubling. It is clear that ballistic 
missile technology is progressing rapidly and proliferating just as 
rapidly and, consequently, the threat to the United States is real. It 
is no longer a perceived threat or a potential threat. It is not a 
threat that may come ten years down the road. This threat is tangible 
and it is here now. I believe that we have a moral responsibility to 
all Americans to do everything possible to defend the United States 
from this threat. Supporting this legislation, in my opinion, is an 
important step in providing a solid defense for the United States 
against limited ballistic missile attacks.
  Moreover, S.257 is a responsible way to address the threat that the 
United States faces. In contrast to previous legislative efforts, most 
of which micro managed this policy by setting a fixed date for 
deployment and by dictating the exact type of missile defense system to 
be deployed, this legislation more properly lays out broad U.S. policy. 
The bill simply--but clearly--calls for deployment of an effective 
system once the technology is possible. No date for deployment is set. 
No requirement for a specific type of ballistic missile defense is 
outlined. By not dictating such requirements, this legislation 
responsibly allows for flexibility for our military experts to develop 
and deploy the best possible missile defense system. This language 
helps ensure that the United State will not rush into deployment with a 
substandard system--at a cost of billions of taxpayer dollars--just to 
be able to say we've deployed a limited missile defense.
  Instead, this legislation will help ensure that the United States has 
deployed a system that has been thoroughly tested and proven 
operationally effective. I fully support this flexible approach.
  Mr. President, let me briefly address the issue of cost. A lot has 
been said about how the original draft of this legislation could have 
bypassed future deliberations about how much the Pentagon should spend 
on missile defense. In effect, many critics of this legislation 
believed this bill would simply be providing a blank check for all 
future missile defense development and deployment efforts. I don't 
believe that is the case. This legislation does not preclude such 
important funding deliberations. However, I was very glad to support 
the amendment that Senator Cochran offered yesterday to make it 
absolutely explicit that Congress will fully debate the cost 
implications of a missile defense system in all annual defense 
authorizations and appropriations proceedings in the future. I plan to 
fully weigh the costs and benefits of missile defense in comparison to 
all other defense programs and to assess all potential threats to the 
United States at the time of those deliberations.
  Finally, I am also pleased that the bill now calls for the United 
States to continue working with the Russians to reduce nuclear weapons. 
I strongly supported the amendment offered by Senator Landrieu which 
added this policy statement to S. 257. The United States and Russia 
have made great progress in reducing nuclear weapons over the past 
decade and both countries need to continue to do so. I think this 
statement of policy calling for continued efforts to reduce nuclear 
weapons is extremely important. We need to make it clear to

[[Page 5018]]

ourselves, to all American citizens, to our allies, and to the world 
that not only does the United States plan to defend itself from the 
threat of limited ballistic missile attacks, but that the best 
protection we can offer our nation is a world in which the fewest 
possible weapons of mass destruction exist.
  Again, I thank Senator Cochran and all the cosponsors for introducing 
this important piece of legislation and for allowing the modifications 
to be made that garnered broad bipartisan support. I believe it is 
entirely appropriate for Congress to make it the policy of the United 
States to deploy an effective missile defense when technologically 
possible. The National Missile Defense Act will help allow this 
Government to keep its most important covenant with the American 
people--to protect their life and liberty.

                          ____________________