[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 1]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 212]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   AMERICA'S NEED FOR MISSILE DEFENSE

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. BOB SCHAFFER

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, January 24, 2002

  Mr. SCHAFFER. Mr. Speaker, though America boasts the world's most 
lethal and sophisticated military, the U.S. is unable to defend itself 
against even one long-range ballistic missile. Should an offensive 
missile launch be perpetrated against America today, the public could 
only stand by helplessly as each missile streaks toward its target. In 
the case of a nuclear attack, the devastation would be unlike anything 
the world has ever seen.
  This reality should be the cause for prudent action, not hysteria. 
The recent decision by President George W. Bush to withdraw the United 
States from the 1972 Anti-ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty was a 
thoughtful, balanced decision, however overdue. The ABM Treaty was 
conceived under different international circumstances with a country 
that no longer exists.
  The treaty was ratified with the Soviet Union which posed the 
singular nuclear threat. Thirty years later, we are more concerned 
about rapid nuclear proliferation by so-called ``rogue'' nations like 
North Korea, Libya, Iran and Iraq that neither abide by norms of 
diplomacy nor engage tangible commitments toward peace. These unstable 
countries have exhibited the capacity to attack defenseless American 
civilians. In addition, Chinese military officials have publicly 
threatened to use long-range missiles against the United States. One 
Chinese officer even named Los Angeles as a target.
  Americans do not have to accept this vulnerability. The United States 
Congress has for years expressed its desire to develop and deploy an 
effective missile defense system--one that provides multiple layers of 
protection against a potential missile attack from anywhere in the 
world.
  The technology exists, and has been perfected for many years. What 
has been missing, up until now, are national leaders with the political 
will to get the job done. Some in Washington, D.C., still believe we 
can simply talk our enemies out of harming Americans or placate their 
hostility by giving them cash from the U.S. Treasury.
  Building upon President Bush's announcement, twenty-three of my 
colleagues in the United States Congress cosigned a letter I authored 
assuring President Bush we are ready to help him make missile defense a 
key funding priority in the Congress. Incredibly, even though the need 
for a national missile defense system was proven back in 1981, funding 
for one has fallen far behind. Where billions of dollars have been 
urgently needed, the Congress has only been willing to spend token 
amounts to keep the research on life support.
  The first responsibility of the federal government is to provide for 
the nation's defense. As a father of five, I am not content with 
America's past decisions to remain vulnerable to tyrant leaders of 
unstable rogue nations. When I tuck my children into bed at night, I 
want to know they will wake up safe in a country that values their 
liberty and is prepared to defend it.
  U.S. defense spending is enduring one of its lowest levels since 
before Pearl Harbor. President Bush is right to make missile defense a 
priority. Weakness is no longer an option.

                          ____________________