|
||||||
|
Home | |
Join Now | |
CND Shop | |
|
||||||
|
Briefings & Information A setback for new nuclear weaponsRick Wayman, for CND December 2004 The US Congress (both the House and the Senate) have rejected various pieces of funding in the President’s FY2005 budget relating to nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons, unlike other military programmes, are overseen by the Energy Department, which is monitored by Congressional energy committees. Rep. David Hobson, a Republican from Ohio, is the chairman of the House Appropriations energy subcommittee. He led the charge against the approval of the funding for nuclear weapons programmes. (1) Specifically, a $27.5 million request for research into the “bunker-buster” nuclear weapon, also known as the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, was rejected. The 13 workers at Sandia and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, who were set to work on the “bunker-buster” project, have already been moved to other projects. The White House had planned to spend over $500 million on the “bunker-buster” project over the next several years. Many analysts say that this would have been enough to move the weapon into production. (2) Congress also rejected a $9 million request to fund research into “advanced concept” low-yield tactical nuclear weapons that could be used on the battlefield. A $30 million request, intended to shorten the lead-time needed to resume nuclear testing at the Nevada Test Site, was also rejected from the budget. There was a request for $29.8 million to find a suitable site to build new nuclear triggers for thermonuclear warheads, also known as “plutonium pits.” This request was cut by $22.8 million, with a final figure of $7 million approved. The Energy Department is prohibited from using this money for construction. It is still possible for Bush to include requests for the same programmes in his FY2006 budget next year. Bryan Wilkes of the National Nuclear Security Administration said that he does not know if the weapons programmes would be included in next year’s budget. (3) David Hobson, the Republican Congressman who led the charge against this funding, has warned that any similar funding request in next year’s budget “would get the same reaction.” (4) Quotes from politiciansDavid Hobson (R-Ohio): The Bush administration “should
read this as a clear signal from Congress” that any attempt to revive
the funding in next year’s budget “would get the same reaction.”
David Hobson (R-Ohio): I will not support Bush’s
“very provocative and overly aggressive policies that undermine
our moral authority to argue that other nations should forgo nuclear weapons…We
cannot advocate for nuclear non-proliferation around the globe and pursue
more useable nuclear weapon options at home.” David Smith (National Institute for Public Policy):
“The problem is the public -- and the Congress reflects this --
just doesn't understand the role of nuclear weapons in the post-Cold War
world." Ed Markey (D-Mass.): This is the biggest victory that arms control advocates in Congress have had since 1992, when we were able to place limits on nuclear testing…If we are to convince other countries to forgo nuclear weapons, we cannot be preparing to build an entire new generation of nuclear weapons here in the US.” Bryan Wilkes (National Nuclear Security Administration): “We think that if the issue had come to a specific floor vote on it we would have prevailed. Instead, it was caught up in the appropriations process.” David Hobson (R-Ohio): “What worries me about the nuclear penetrator is that some idiot might try to use it.” Dianne Feinstein (D-California): This is a “consequential
victory for those of us who believe the United States sends a wrong signal
to the rest of the world by reopening the nuclear door and beginning testing
and development of a new generation of nuclear weapons.” Additional ResourcesIn addition to the citations above and in the endnotes below, the following articles have information on the Congressional budget cuts: http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20041122-123518-6574r.htm Footnotes
|
|||||||||||||||||