Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
IT MERITS CONSIDERATION TO SEE
IF WE CAN DO THIS SMALL PLUS UP
ACCOUNT FOR SMALL SITES.
IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP
WITH THAT, I YIELD BACK MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY RISE?
MOVE TO
STRIKE THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED.
I APPRECIATE
MY COLLEAGUE'S ADVOCACY FOR
REMOVING URANIUM AT THE
FACILITY IN HIS DISTRICT IN
UTAH TO PROTECT THE COLORADO
RIVER DOWNSTREAM WATER USERS.
THERE HAS BEEN, AS I'M SURE HE
WOULD ADMIT, TREMENDOUS
PROGRESS AT THIS SITE WHERE
WORK WAS ACCELERATED WITH AN
INFLUX OF $100 MILLION FROM THE
STIMULUS BILL OR RECOVERY ACT.
OUR BILL FOR THE RECORD FULLY
FUNDS THE PRESIDENT'S REQUEST
FOR NONDEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL
CLEANUP, IT PROVIDES $198
MILLION OF SUSTAIN -- TO
SUSTAIN ONGOING CLEANUP
PROJECTS.
WHILE THIS IS A REDUCTION FROM
FISCAL YEAR 2012, IT IS A
REASONABLE ONE CONSIDERING THE
NEED TO REDUCE OVERALL FEDERAL
SPENDING IN OUR BILL.
THE AMOUNT FOR THE PROJECT
WHICH MY COLLEAGUE IS
PARTICULARLY CONCERNED ABOUT IS
SUSTAINED AT $31 MILLION, THE
2012.
SAME AMOUNT AS THE FISCAL YEAR
THIS AMENDMENT INCREASES
FUNDING OVER THE REQUEST AND
OVER LAST YEAR'S LEVEL FOR IT.
WHILE MANY SITES LIKE MOAB IS
STRUGGLING TO REDUCE CLEANUP
WORK FOLLOWING THE RECOVERY
ACT, WE SIMPLY CAN'T MAINTAIN
THESE HIGHLY ELEVATED FUNDING
LEVELS.
AS AN OFFSET, THIS AMENDMENT
PROPOSES TO TAKE RESOURCES FROM
IMPORTANT NATIONAL SECURITY
ACTIVITIES.
IT IS UNACCEPTABLY STRIKES
FUNDING FOR PRIORITY
INVESTMENTS AND OUR -- IN OUR
NUCLEAR SECURITY ENTERPRISE
WHICH IS LONG OVERDUE.
THUS I ASK MEMBERS TO VOTE NO
ON HIS AMENDMENT AND YIELD
BACK.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM INDIANA RISE?
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST
WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I RISE IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
THE GENTLEMAN'S AMENDMENT.
I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE
CONCERNS HE HAS EXPRESSED ABOUT
CLEANUP NATIONALLY AS WELL AS
THE SITE ILLUSTRATED IN UTAH
AND SHARE HIS CONCERNS THAT WE
ARE NOT ADEQUATELY INVESTED IN
CLEANING UP CONTAMINATED
COMMUNITIES WHERE WE HAVE A
MR.
NATIONAL OBLIGATION.
THIS WOULD MAKE
A CUT OF $9.6 MILLION TO THE
WEAPONS PROGRAM BUT WOULD POINT
OUT TO MY COLLEAGUES WHILE I
SUPPORT THE WEAPONS COMPLEX AND
ITS MODERNIZATION, THIS IS A
VERY SLIGHT CHANGE IN FUNDING.
AN ACCOUNT THAT HAS A $7.5
BILLION ALLOCATION AND SEES A
$275 MILLION INCREASE FOR 2013
UNDER THE BILL AND THEREFORE
THE GENTLEMAN HAS TAKEN A
REASONABLE APPROACH AND
STRONGLY SUPPORT HIS AMENDMENT.
I WOULD YIELD BACK MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM UTAH.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,
THE NOES HAVE IT.
MR. CHAIRMAN, ON
THAT I REQUEST FOR A RECORDED
VOTE.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6
OF RULE 18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM UTAH WILL BE
POSTPONED.
THE CLERK WILL CONTINUE TO
READ.
PAGE 25, LINE 6,
URANIUM ENRICHMENT.
$425,493,000.
DECOMMISSIONING FUND.
SCIENCE, $4,824,931,000.
ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS,
AGENCY, ENERGY, $200 MILLION.
NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL, $25
MILLION.
TITLE 17, INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY
LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM, SUMS
DERIVED FROM AMOUNTS RECEIVED
FROM BORROWERS PURSUANT TO THE
POLICY ACT OF 2005 SHALL
BE COLLECTED IN ACCORDANCE OF
THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT OF
1974.
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY, VEHICLES
MANUFACTURING, LOAN PROGRAM, $6
MILLION TO REMAIN AVAILABLE
UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30, 2014.
DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION,
$230,783,000 TO REMAIN
AVAILABLE UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30,
2014.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM
ILLINOIS SURPRISE
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE AN
THE CLERK WILL
REPORT THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MR. SHIMKUS OF ILLINOIS.
PAGE 28, LINE 16, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT INSERT REDUCED BY
$10 MILLION.
PAGE 49, LINE 25, AFTER THE
SECOND DOLLAR AMOUNT, INSERT
INCREASE BY $10 MILLION.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
ILLINOIS IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE
MINUTES ON HIS AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN.
MR. CHAIRMAN, THE NUCLEAR
REGULATORY COMMISSION, THE
N.R.C., HAS ADEQUATE FUNDS TO
RESUME LICENSING ACTIVITIES FOR
THE YUCCA NUCLEAR WASTE
REPOSITORY AS CALLED FOR IN THE
NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY ACT, BUT
IT REFUSES TO DO SO.
THE N.R.C. CLAIMS IT HAS THE
LEGAL AUTHORITY TO IGNORE THE
LAW DULY ENACTED BY THIS
CONGRESS IF THE AGENCY IS NOT
GIVEN ENOUGH MONEY TO
QUOTE-UNQUOTE FINISH THE JOB.
UNDER OUR CONSTITUTION AGENCIES
ARE FUNDED YEAR TO YEAR.
THEY ARE SELDOM IF EVER GIVEN
ENOUGH MONEY IN ONE YEAR TO DO
WHAT THE LAW EXPECTS THEM TO
DO, ESPECIALLY FOR LONG-TERM
PROJECTS.
IN 1998 WHEN THE YUCK AWE
PROCEEDINGS HAPPENED, THEY GAVE
ONE YEAR.
THEM ENOUGH MONEY TO DO IT IN
WE DIDN'T GIVE THEM ENOUGH
MONEY TO CARRY OUT THE
THREE-YEAR LICENSING.
THE N.R.C. DIDN'T STOP BECAUSE
FINISH THE JOB.
IT DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO
IN FACT, N.R.C. ONLY STOPPED
THE LICENSING AND REFUSED TO
SPEND MONEY APPROPRIATED FOR
LICENSING BASED UPON THE
ADMINISTRATION'S POLICY
DECISION THAT THE SITE IS NO
LONGER WORKABLE.
NOW, AFTER BEING HAULED INTO
FEDERAL COURT FOR IGNORING A
STATUTORY DUTY TO DECIDE THE
LICENSE APPLICATION IN THREE
YEARS, THE N.R.C. CLAIMS IT
DOESN'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LAW
BECAUSE WHILE IT HAS PLENTY OF
MONEY TO RESUME THE LICENSING
PROCESS AND MOVE IT FORWARD, IT
DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO
FINISH IT.
WHEN WE PASS A LAW AND TELL AN
AGENCY TO DO SOMETHING AND GIVE
IT ENOUGH MONEY TO DO THE JOB
DURING A GIVEN YEAR, CAN THE
AGENCY JUST THUMB ITS NOSE AND
SAY, WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO
THAT JOB AT ALL BECAUSE
CONGRESS DIDN'T GIVE US ENOUGH
MONEY TO DO THE JOB THE NEXT
YEAR?
NO AGENCY HAS EVER SUCCESSFULLY
TOLD A COURT NOT TO MAKE IT
FOLLOW THE LAW BECAUSE IN SOME
FUTURE YEAR IT MIGHT NOT GET
ENOUGH MONEY TO DO THE JOB THE
LAW REQUIRES.
ALLOWING N.R.C. TO CANCEL YUCCA
WOULD UNCONSTITUTIONALLY SHIFT
THE BALANCE OF POWERS TO
EXECUTIVE AGENCIES TO EVADE
CONNELLY MANDATED LEGAL
AUTHORITIES.
THE FEDERAL APELLATE COURT HAS
LAW KNOWN.
MADE THE DISPLEASURE FOR THE
WE NEED TO DO THE SAME.
THIS IS AN OUTRAGEOUS
UNILATERAL DECISION TO STOP
YUCCA AND NOT SPEND FUNDS
SPECIFICALLY APPROPRIATED FOR
LICENSING ACTIVITIES.
NO AGENCY CAN IGNORE A
STATUTORY DUTY TO PROCEED WITH
A PROJECT BASED ON A SUBJECTIVE
DETERMINATION THAT ADEQUATE
FUNDS MAY NOT BE AVAILABLE TO
COMPLETE THE PROJECT IN THE
FUTURE.
WE NEED TO SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE
TO EVERY AGENCY THAT THIS ISN'T
HOW TOWER CONSTITUTION WORKS.
SO ON -- ISN'T HOW OUR
CONSTITUTION WORKS.
SO ON TOP TO THE MONEY THEY
NEED TO START THE RELICENSING
PROCESS, THIS PROVIDES AN
ADDITIONAL $10 MILLION IN NEW
FUNDS TO CONTINUE THE PROJECT.
IT IS OFFSET BY TAKING FUNDS
FROM THE D.O.E.'S DEPARTMENTAL
ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNT.
WE ARE ASKING D.O.E. TO DO MORE
WITH A LITTLE LESS BY MAKING
MODEST CUTS TO AN ACCOUNT FOR
SALARIES AND EXPENSES.
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE
YES ON THE AMENDMENT TO FUND
THE LEGALLY REQUIRED LICENSING
PROCESS FOR YUCCA MOUNTAIN SO
THAT THE N.R.C. AND INDEPENDENT
GOVERNMENT AGENCY HAS FUNDING
NECESSARY TO FINISH THEIR
THOROUGH OBJECTIVE AND
TECHNICAL -- THOROUGH,
OBJECTIVE AND TECHNICAL REVIEW.
IT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER YUCCA
WILL MAKE A SAFE REPOSITORY.
HAVING SPENT 30 YEARS AND
RATEPAYER MONEY, THEY NEED TO
FIND OUT IF YUCCA IS SAFE.
WHETHER YOU FAVOR NUCLEAR POWER
OR YUCCA MOUNTAIN ISN'T THE
ONLY ISSUE.
THE CORE ISSUE IS WHETHER LAWS
WE PASSED MAY BE COMPLETELY
IGNORED BY AGENCIES IF THEY
THINK THAT SOMEDAY THEY MAY NOT
GET ENOUGH MONEY TO FINISH THE
JOB.
ALLOWING AGENCIES TO GET AWAY
WOULD RESULT IN SHIFTING POWERS
TO UNELECTED BUREAUCRATS.
WITH THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN, I ASK
MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT THE
BACK MY TIME.
SHIMKUS AMENDMENT AND I YIELD
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM WASHINGTON RISE?
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE
REQUISITE NUMBER OF WORDS.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I RISE IN SUPPORT OF
THE SHIMKUS AMENDMENT WHICH
WOULD CARRY OUT ITS
WOULD ENSURE THAT THE N.R.C.
RESPONSIBILITIES WITH REGARD TO
THE HIGH-LEVEL WASTE REPOSITORY
AT YUCCA MOUNTAIN.
I REDIRECT THE POSITION THAT
ISSUE.
ON THE APPROPRIATIONS
THE N.R.C. HAS TAKEN ON THIS
COMMITTEE, IT IS OUR BELIEF
THAT THE COMMISSION HAS
ADEQUATE FUNDS TO RESUME
LICENSING ACTIVITIES FOR THE
YUCCA MOUNTAIN PROJECT, AS
CALLED FOR IN THE NUCLEAR WASTE
POLICY ACT.
BUT THE COMMISSION SIMPLY HAS
REFUSED TO ACT.
THE N.R.C. CLAIMS IT HAS THE
LEGAL AUTHORITY TO IGNORE THE
CONGRESS IF THE -- DULY ENACTED
LAW DULLY ENACTED BY THIS
BY THIS HAD CONGRESS IF THE
AGENCY IS GIVEN ENOUGH MONEY TO
FINISH THE JOB.
UNDER OUR CONSTITUTION AGENCIES
ARE FUNDED YEAR TO YEAR.
THEY ARE SELDOM IF EVER GIVEN
ENOUGH MONEY IN ONE YEAR TO DO
EVERYTHING THE LAW TELLS THEM
TO DO, ESPECIALLY FOR LONG-TERM
PROJECTS.
IN 2008, WHEN THE YUCCA
MOUNTAIN LICENSING PROCEEDINGS
STARTED, CONGRESS APPROPRIATED
SUFFICIENT FUNDS TO THE N.R.C.
THAT FISCAL YEAR.
TO CONDUCT THE PROCEEDING FOR
IN 2009, WE GAVE N.R.C. ENOUGH
MONEY TO CARRY OUT THOSE
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR ANOTHER
YEAR.
THE N.R.C. DIDN'T STOP BECAUSE
THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE ENTIRE
AMOUNT OF MONEY FINISH THE JOB.
THEY ONLY STOPPED THE LICENSING
AND REFUSED TO SPEND MONEY
APPROPRIATED FOR LICENSING
BASED ON A UNILATERAL POLICY
DECISION THAT THE SITE IS NO
LONGER WORKABLE.
NOW, AFTER BEING BROUGHT TO
FEDERAL COURT FOR IGNORING ITS
STATUTORY DUTY TO DECIDE THE
LICENSE APPLICATION IN THREE
YEARS, THE N.R.C. CLAIMED
ASTOUNDINGLY THAT IT DOES NOT
HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LAW BECAUSE
WHILE IT HAD PLENTY OF MONEY TO
RESUME THE LICENSING PROCESS TO
MOVE IT FORWARD, IT DOESN'T
HAVE EVERY DOLLAR IN HAND THAT
WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE
THE PROCESS.
WHEN CONGRESS PASSES A LAW,
APPROPRIATES MONEY AND DIRECTS
AN AGENCY TO CARRY OUT AN
IMPORTANT GOVERNMENT FUNCTION
DURING ANY GIVEN FISCAL YEAR,
THAT AGENCY CANNOT JUST THUMB
ITS NOSE AND SAY WE'RE NOT
GOING TO DO THAT JOB AT ALL.
BECAUSE CONGRESS DIDN'T GIVE US
THE MONEY TO DO THE FOLLOWING
YEAR'S WORK.
NO AGENCY HAS EVER SUCCESSFULLY
TOLD A COURT NOT TO MAKE IT
FOLLOW THE LAW BECAUSE IN SOME
FUTURE YEAR IT MIGHT NOT GET
ENOUGH MONEY TO DO THE JOB THE
LAW REQUIRES.
ALLOWING THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION SUCH POWER TO
EFFECTIVELY CANCEL YUCCA
MOUNTAIN AFTER CONGRESS HAS
ENACTED A LAW DIRECTING THAT IT
BE ACCOMPLISHED WOULD BE AN
AFFRONT TO THE CONSTITUTION AND
IT SHOULD SHIFT THE BALANCE OF
POWER TO EXECUTIVE AGENCIES TO
LEGAL
OBLIGATIONS -- CONGRESSIONALLY
MANDATED LEGAL OBLIGATIONS.
WE NEED TO MAKE THE POSITION
KNOWN AND THE SHIMKUS AMENDMENT
WOULD ASSUME THAT THE
COMMISSION PROCEEDS WITH THE
DETERMINATION OF WHETHER YUCCA
MOUNTAIN IS AN APPROPRIATE
LOCATION FOR A SAFE REPOSITORY.
THE AMENDMENT IS BUDGET
NEUTRAL, FULLY OFFSET BY
REDIRECTING FUNDS FROM D.O.E.'S
ACCOUNT.
DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION
I URGE THE ADOPTION OF THE
SHIMKUS AMENDMENT AND YIELD
BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM WASHINGTON RISE?
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN.
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN.
I WANT TO THANK THE SPONSOR OF
THIS AMENDMENT, MR. SHIMKUS,
FOR BRINGING THIS AMENDMENT
FORWARD, AND I WANT TO THANK
THE RANKING MEMBER FROM MY HOME
STATE OF WASHINGTON AND THE
CHAIRMAN OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
FOR THEIR SUPPORT, ALSO, OF
THIS AMENDMENT.
THIS IS VERY SERIOUS BUSINESS
WHEN THE ADMINISTRATION IS
ABSOLUTELY IGNORING STATUTORY
CONGRESS.
LAW THAT WAS PASSED BY THIS
AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, GOING
WAY BACK TO 1995, THIS HOUSE
HAS ACTED 32 DIFFERENT TIMES
PRINCIPALLY ON THESE
APPROPRIATION BILLS AS THEY
COME FORWARD TO ADDRESS THIS
ISSUE.
GENERALLY THE ISSUE IS TO NOT
FUND YUCCA MOUNTAIN.
32 TIMES THIS HOUSE SINCE 1995
HAS SAID WE ARE GOING TO FUND
YUCCA MOUNTAIN.
SO I THINK THAT THE CONGRESS
HAS -- AND CERTAINLY THE HOUSE
-- HAS WELL ESTABLISHED WHAT
THEIR POSITION IS IN THE
SERIOUSNESS OF MAKING SURE THAT
YUCCA MOUNTAIN BECOMES OUR --
I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO
YIELD TO MY FRIEND.
WE PASSED A LAW THAT
WAS SIGNED BY THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES AT THAT TIME.
I CAN REMEMBER CONGRESSMAN
UDALL WAS CHAIR OF THE
COMMITTEE AT THAT TIME.
WE PASSED THE LAW, SAID DO
HAS NOT BEEN REPEALED.
YUCCA MOUNTAIN, AND THAT LAW
THAT'S STILL THE LAW OF THE
GENTLEMAN.
LAND, AND I YIELD BACK TO THE
RECLAIMING MY
TIME.
THAT'S PRECISELY THE POINT THAT
REPEATED OVER AND OVER.
YOU MADE AND IT NEEDS TO BE
THIS IS STATUTORY LAW.
AND 32 DIFFERENT TIMES IT HAS
ATTEMPTED TO BE MODIFIED ON THE
HOUSE FLOOR AND 32 TIMES IT HAS
BEEN REJECTED SINCE 1995.
LET ME PUT A PERSONAL NOTE
BECAUSE I REPRESENT THE HANFORD
AREA.
IT WAS PART OF THE MANHATTAN
PROJECT.
WE DEVELOPED THE ATOMIC
WEAPONS.
IT CREATED A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT
OF WASTE.
IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON --
AND THE STATE OF WASHINGTON HAS
LEGAL AGREEMENT WITH THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO CLEAN UP
IT'S CALLED THE TRIPARTY
THAT WASTE.
AGREEMENT.
BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF
THE SCOPE OF WHAT NEEDS TO BE
CLEANED UP THERE, THE WASTE IN
UNDERGROUND TANKS AT HANFORD
WOULD FILL THIS CHAMBER OVER 21
TIMES WITH RADIOACTIVE AND/OR
HAZARDOUS WASTE AND THAT'S THE
WASTE THAT GOES TO THE --
EVENTUALLY GO TO THE REPOSITORY
AFTER IT IS CLASSIFIED.
SO I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM
ILLINOIS FOR BRINGING THIS
AMENDMENT FORWARD AND I URGE MY
AMENDMENT.
COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT THIS
IT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT.
THIS WILL BE THE 33RD TIME I
CONTEND THAT THIS HOUSE WILL
HAVE REAFFIRMED THAT YUCCA
SHOULD BE THE REPOSITORY AND
WITH THAT I YIELD BACK MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY RISE?
MOVE TO
STRIKE THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I RISE TO
SPEAK VERY BRIEFLY TO ASSOCIATE
MY REMARKS WITH MR. DICKS, DR.
HASTINGS AND MR. SHIMKUS.
I WANT TO THANK THEM FOR
BRINGING THIS AMENDMENT FORWARD
TO INCREASE FUNDING FOR
LICENSING FOR YUCCA.
THIS IS A BIPARTISAN EFFORT.
IT'S NOT ONLY BIPARTISAN, THE
-- THERE'S SUPPORT FROM
AUTHORIZERS AND APPROPRIATORS.
I'M HIGHLY APPRECIATIVE OF
THEIR INITIATIVE.
I THINK IT OUGHT TO BE
SUPPORTED BY ALL MEMBERS.
I THINK WE OUGHT TO MOVE
FORWARD AND SEND A MESSAGE.
WE NEED TO GET YUCCA OPEN AND
THIS IS A WAY TO RECLAIM THE
$15 BILLION THAT'S BEEN PUT
INTO THAT EFFORT BY KEEPING THE
BOARD.
LICENSE PROCESS OPEN AND ABOVE
I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY
FOR WHAT PURPOSE
TIME.
DOES THE GENTLEMAN RISE?
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST
WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED.
I BELIEVE THE
DEBATE ON THIS HAS BEEN
FRUITFUL AND WILL SIMPLY ADD MY
VOICE TO THEIRS.
I BELIEVE THE ADMINISTRATION
AND SENATE'S ONGOING ATTEMPTS
TO SHUT THIS DOWN ARE WITHOUT
SCIENTIFIC MERIT AND ARE
CONTRARY, AS HAS BEEN SAID ON
THE FLOOR, TO EXISTING LAW AND
CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTION.
UNDER THE NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY
ACT OF 198 TO, THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT HAS A RESPONSIBILITY
TO DEMONSTRATE ITS CAPABILITY
TO MEET ITS CONTRACTUAL
OBLIGATION BY ADDRESSING THE
SPENT FUEL AND OTHER HIGH LEVEL
AND PERMANENTLY
SHUT DOWN REACTORS.
WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT THE
ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT
UNILATERALLY DICTATE POLICY FOR
KNEW CLEEFER WASTE DISPOSAL AND
I STRONGLY URGE MY COLLEAGUES
TO JOIN MY IN SUPPORTING THE
GENTLEMAN'S AMENDMENT AND I
YIELD BACK MY TIME.
THE QUESTION IS ON
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,
THE AYES HAVE IT.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I REQUEST A
RECORDED VOTE.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
ILLINOIS REQUESTS THE RECORDED
VOTE.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6 OF RULE
18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS WILL BE
POSTPONED.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLELADY FROM CALIFORNIA
RISE?
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE AN
THE CLERK WILL
REPORT THE AMENDMENT.
OFFER PID
MS. SANCHEZ OF CALIFORNIA, PAGE
28, LINE 16, AFTER THE DOLLAR
AMOUNT, INSERT REDUCED BY $16
MILLION.
PAGE 30, LINE 25, AFTER THE
DOLLAR AMOUNT, INSERT INCREASED
BY $16 MILLION.
THE GENTLELADY FROM
CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR
FIVE MINUTES ON HER AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN.
I OFFER AN AMENDMENT TO
INCREASE FUNDING FOR THE
NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY
ADMINISTRATIONS DEFENSE
NONPROLIFERATION PROGRAM BY $16
MILLION.
THIS IS A SMALL RESTORATION OF
FUNDS AND IT WOULD RESTORE THE
DEMROBAL THREAT REDUCTION
INITIATIVE TO OUR FISCAL YEAR
2012 LEVELS.
IT'S REALLY JUST A SMALL
INCREASE IN FUNDS BUT IT WILL
GO A LONG WAY IN PARTICULAR FOR
THE PRESIDENT'S TOP NATIONAL
SECURITY PRIORITIES.
THE $16 MILLION WOULD COME FROM
THE DEPARTMENT OF -- FROM THE
ACCOUNT.
DEPARTMENT'S ADMINISTRATION
SPECIFICALLY, THIS $16 MILLION
TRANSFER WOULD RESTORE HALF OF
THE FUNDS THAT HAD BEEN CUT
FROM THE GLOBAL THREAT
REDUCTION INITIATIVE TO COUNTER
THE RISK OF NUCLEAR TERRORISM.
THE DANGER THAT NUCLEAR WEAPONS
AND MATERIALS MIGHT SPREAD TO
COUNTRIES THAT ARE HOSTILE TO
US OR TO TERRORISTS WHO WANT TO
USE THESE AGAINST US IS ONE OF
THE GRAVEST DANGERS THAT WE
HAVE TO THE UNITED STATES.
AND NONPROLIFERATION PROGRAMS
ARE ONE OF THE LEAST EXPENSIVE
WAYS AND THEY'RE CRITICAL FOR
THE U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY AND
THEY MUST BE A TOP PRIORITY.
IT'S OUR LINE OF FIRST DEFENSE.
IT IS THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE
WAY TO I A CHIEF THE MOST
URGENT OF GOALS WHICH IS
SECURING AND REDUCING THE
AMOUNT OF VULNERABLE BOMB GRADE
MATERIAL.
THE FUNDING OF THE GLOBAL
THREAT REDUCTION INITIATIVE
SPECIFICALLY SUPPORTS SECURING
VULNERABLE NUCLEAR MATERIAL
AROUND THE WORLD IN FOUR YEARS.
IN FOUR YEARS.
IN ORDER TO PREVENT THIS DEADLY
MATERIAL FROM FALLING INTO THE
HANDS OF TERRORISTS WHO HAVE
INTENT ON DOING US HARM.
AND LET ME GIVE YOU A SPECIFIC
EXAMPLE OF WHY THIS IS SO
IMPORTANT.
THE INCREASE IN FUNDS WOULD
HELP ACCELERATE THE CONVERSION
OF RESEARCH REACTORS AND THE
REMOVAL -- REMOVAL OF
VULNERABLE, HIGHLY ENRICHED
URANIUM.
THE NEED TO ACCELERATE THOSE
IMPORTANT EFFORTS CAN BE SEEN,
FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE EXAMPLE OF
BELARUS.
WHICH HAD ENOUGH H.E.U. FOR
SEVERAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND
AGREED IN 2010 TO GIVE UP THIS
MATERIAL.
NOW THE NNSA CLEANED OUT A
PORTION OF THAT MATERIAL BUT IN
2011, BELARUS RENEGED ON ITS
AGREEMENT BECAUSE IT WAS ANGRY
AT THE IMPOSITION OF U.S.
SANCTIONS ON THAT REGIME.
THERE ARE STILL -- THERE IS
STILL A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF
HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM THAT
SIT THERE IS IN BELARUS.
IT COULD HAVE BEEN CLEANED OUT
THE NNSA IF IT HAD HAD FIVE
MORE MONTHS BEFORE BELARUS SAID
NO.
THIS ILLUSTRATES WHY IT'S SO
IMPORTANT FOR US TO PUT THE
MONEY IN, TO GO AND CLEAN THESE
PLACES UP BEFORE PEOPLE DECIDE
OR NEW REGIMES COME IN AND ALL
OF A SUDDEN WE CAN'T GET TO
WHAT IS VERY DANGEROUS
MATERIALS FOR US.
WE CAN'T SQUANDER THE
OPPORTUNITIES TO MOVE FORWARD
ON THIS URGENT PRIORITY.
THE 9/11 COMMISSION AND THE
NUCLEAR POSTURE COMMISSION
NOTED THAT THE ADDRESSING OF
THIS ISSUE IS IMPORTANT, THIS
IS A GRAVE DANGER, WITH THE
NUCLEAR POSTURE COMMISSION
WARNING THAT THE URGENCY ARISES
FROM THE IMMINENT DANGER OF
NUCLEAR TERRORISM IF WE PASS A
TIPPING POINT IN NUCLEAR
PROLIFERATION.
I URGE SUPPORT FOR A VERY
MODEST INCREASE OF $16 MILLION
SIGNIFICANTLY HELP US
REDUCE THE DANGEROUS DELAYS TO
THESE VERY IMPORTANT
NONPROLIFERATION PROGRAMS.
I YIELD BACK.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
THE SCREALT YIELDS
BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY RISE?
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST
WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED.
I RISE IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS AMENDMENT.
THOUGH LESS THAN LAST YEAR'S
LEVEL, THE AMOUNT IN THE BILL
SHOWS THE STRONG SUPPORT OF OUR
COMMITTEE FOR NONPROLIFERATION.
WE FULLY FUND THE CORE
NONPROLIFERATION PROGRAMS TO
SECURE VULNERABLE NUCLEAR
FOUR YEARS.
MATERIALS AROUND THE WORLD IN
IN FACT, IT GOES FURTHER AND
PROVIDES AN ADDITIONAL $28
MILLION ABOVE THE REQUEST FOR
THE INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS
UNDER WHAT'S CALLED THE GLOBAL
THREAT REDUCTION INITIATIVE.
WHILE I APPRECIATE OUR
COLLEAGUE'S SUPPORT FOR THESE
ACTIVITIES, THERE'S SIMPLY NO
REASON TO PROVIDE EVEN MORE
FUNDING.
THE INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES
HAVE BEEN CLEARLY LAID OUT IN
THE FOUR-YEAR PLAN WHICH PEAKED
IN 2011.
THESE ACTIVITIES ARE SUPPORTED
TO RAMP DOWN AS WE ACCOMPLISH
MORE AND MORE PROJECTS A I
BROAD.
THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REFLECTS
THAT PLAN RAMP DOWN.
THIS ADDITIONAL FUNDING WOULD
LIKELY SIT THERE UNEXPENDED.
THE NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY
AGENCY ALREADY HAS CONSIDERABLE
PROBLEMS GETTING OTHER
COUNTRIES TO FOLLOW THROUGH
WITH AGREEMENTS.
THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE
HAS CONFIRMS THAT HALF OF ALL
THE FUNDING WE PROVIDE EACH
YEAR IS NOT SPENT.
TO USE THE WORDS I HEARD A FEW
MINUTES AGO, THE MONEY IS
SITTING THERE.
THIS ADECISIONAL FUNDING IS
SIMPLY NOT NEEDED AND I ASK THE
MEMBERS TO REJECT THIS
AMENDMENT AND YIELD BACK THE
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BECOME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN RISE?
MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST
WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECK NIGHED.
I RISE IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THE GENTLEWOMAN'S
AMENDMENT AND COMMEND HER FOR
CRAFTING IT.
AS I POINTED OUT IN EARLIER
REMARKS, I DO APPRECIATE THE
CHAIRMAN'S EFFORTS AS WELL AS
THE MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE
AND FULL COMMITTEE TO INCREASE
MONEY SET ASIDE FOR THE GLOBAL
THREAT REDUCTION INITIATIVE.
IN FACT, THE CHAIRMAN WAS
RESPONSIBLE FOR ADDING $17
MILLION ABOVE THE
ADMINISTRATION'S CURRENT
REQUEST.
HOWEVER, I DO BELIEVE THAT MORE
CAN BE DONE AND THAT THE
SANCHEZ AMENDMENT, BY ADDING
$16 MILLION TO THE GLOBAL
THREAT REDUCTION INITIATIVE,
WOULD GET US VERY CLOSE TO OUR
CURRENT YEAR APPROPRIATED
LEVEL.
I BELIEVE AS A NATION OUR
GREATEST SECURITY THREAT IS NOT
A LAUNCHED ATTACK BY ANOTHER
NATION STATE.
-- NATION STATE, BUT THE USE OF
AN ACT OF TERROR.
NUCLEAR WEAPONS OR MATERIALS IN
GIVEN THAT PARTICULAR THREAT, I
DO BELIEVE EVERY DOLLAR COUNTS
AND EVERY DOLLAR OF THESE $16
MILLION COUNT AND WOULD ASK MY
SUPPORT THE
GENTLEWOMAN'S AMENDMENT AND I
WOULD YIELD BACK MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLELADY FROM CALIFORNIA.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,
THE NOES HAVE IT.
MR. CHAIRMAN.
THE GENTLELADY FROM
CALIFORNIA.
I REQUEST A
RECORDED VOTE, PLEASE.
THE GENTLELADY
REQUESTS A VORDED -- RECORDED
VOTE.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6 OF RULE
18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ON THE
AMENDMENT WILL BE POSTPONED.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM VERMONT RISE?
I HAVE AP AMENDMENT AT THE
DESK.
THE CLERK WILL DEZ
IGTHATE THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 7
PRINTED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD OFFERED BY MR. WELCH OF
VERMONT.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
VERMONT IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE
MINUTES ON HIS AMENDMENT.
I THANK YOU, MR.
SPEAKER.
MR. SPEAKER, REPRESENTATIVE
GARDNER OF COLORADO AND I OFFER
AMENDMENT, HE'S THE LEAD
SPONSOR BUT HIS PLANE IS LATE
AND I'M STANDING IN IN HIS
PLACE AS A CO-SPONSOR.
PREVIOUS LEGISLATION BY THIS
CONGRESS REQUIRED OUR
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES TO DO AN
ENERGY AUDIT.
AND THE REASON BEHIND THAT
NVERAGE AUDIT WAS THAT IT WOULD
LEAD TO ENERGY SAVINGS.
THERE ARE FIRMS THAT CAN DO
ENERGY SAVING CONTRACTS AT NO
EXPENSE TO THE TAXPAYER, NO
EXPENSE WHATSOEVER TO THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
THE POINT OF THIS AMENDMENT IS
TO HAVE THE DEPARTMENT OF
ENERGY AND OTHER GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN
DIRECTED TO DO THE ENERGY AUDIT
TO GET ON WITH IT.
AND THE REASON WE WANT TO HAVE
IT DONE YESTERDAY IS SO THAT WE
CAN BEGIN TODAY ACHIEVING
SAVINGS FOR THE AMERICAN
TAXPAYER.
THERE'S A LOT OF DEBATE IN
CONGRESS AMONG US AS TO WHAT
POLICY.
BUT THERE IS IMMENSE CONSENSUS
THAT WHATEVER ENERGY POLICY YOU
FAVOR, SAVING ENERGY, USING
LESS RATHER THAN MORE, SAVING
TAXPAYER DOLLARS, IS A WISE
THING TO DO IN EVERY SINGLE
POLICY THAT MIGHT BE ADVANCED
AISLE.
BY MEMBERS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE
SO THE POINT OF THE AMENDMENT
THAT MR. GARDNER AND I OFFER IS
BASICALLY TO SAY TO THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT THAT, HEY, LET'S
AUDIT THE ENERGY USE IN OUR
BUILDINGS, LET'S TAKE PRACTICAL
STEPS TO SAVE MONEY, LET'S USE
A TOOL THAT COSTS TAXPAYERS NO
MONEY AND GUARANTEES THAT
GET ON WITH IT.
THEY'LL SAVE MONEY AND LET'S
SO MR. SPEAKER, WE SEEK SUPPORT
FOR THIS AMENDMENT.
BEFORE I YIELD, I DO WANT TO
MENTION ONE ASPECT OF THE BILL
TO WHICH I AM OPPOSED, AND I'M
SPEAKING ON MY OWN HERE, NOT
WITH MY CO-SPONSOR.
THAT'S A RIDER IN THE BILL,
433 LAYS OUT A ROAD MAP
FOR DESIGNING INCREASINGLY
ENERGY EFFICIENT NEW BUILDINGS
AND THE PROVISION HAS A CLAUSE
IN IT THAT WILL DRIVE ADVANCES
IN BUILDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY
DEEP RETROFITS AND SAVINGS IN
TAXPAYER DOLLARS WHILE REDUCING
CARBON POLLUTION AND YIELDING
-- LEADING BY EXAMPLE.
THE D.O.E. IS WORKING TO
DEVELOP RULES THAT IMPLEMENT
THIS IN A WORKABLE, FLEXIBLE
MANNER BUT THE FUNDING RIDER
I YIELD BACK.
WOULD BLOCK THAT.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY RISE?
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST
WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED.
WE HAVE NO
OBJECTION TO THE AMENDMENT.
WE THINK IT'S A GOOD WAY TO
ENACT IT.
IT'S A COMMON SENSE APPROACH
AND WE HAVE NO OBJECTION.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM VERMONT.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,
THE AYES HAVE IT.
IS ADOPTED.
THE AYES HAVE IT, THE AMENDMENT
READ.
THE CLERK WILL CONTINUE TO
PAGE 29, LINE 11,
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL.
$43,468,000 TO REMAIN AVAILABLE
UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30, 2014.
ACTIVITIES.
ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE
NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY
$7,577,341,000.
ADMINISTRATION.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE --
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO RISE?
I HAVE AN AMENDMENT
AT THE DESK.
CLERK WILL REPORT
THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY
MR. POLESS OF COLORADO.
LINE 30, LINE 5, INSERT
REDUCED BY $298, 221,000.
PAGE 56, LINE 24, AFTER THE
AMOUNT INSERT INCREASED
BY $298,221,000.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
COLORADO IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE
MINUTES ON HIS AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN.
THE POLIS-MARKEY AMENDMENT
WOULD REDUCE FUNDING FOR
UNNEEDED NUCLEAR WEAPONS
PROGRAM BY $298 MILLION TO
REDUCE THE BUDGET DEFICIT.
AT A TIME OF DECISIONS, AT A
TIME OF CHOICES, WE NEED TO ASK
OURSELVES, HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH
WITH REGARD TO NUCLEAR DEFENSE?
THESE PROGRAMS, INCLUDED IN
THIS AMENDMENT, HAVE
CONSISTENTLY BEEN OVERBUDGET
AND INEFFECTUAL.
WE CERTAINLY DON'T NEED TO BE
INCREASING FUNDING FOR THEM.
THIS AMENDMENT SIMPLY
ELIMINATES THE INCREASE AT A
TIME WHEN WE'RE FOCUSED ON
DEFICIT REDUCTION.
WE ALL AGREE THAT WE NEED TO
SPENDING.
STOP WASTEFUL GOVERNMENT
CONGRESS HAS TO JUSTIFY EVERY
PENNY IT SPENDS TO THE
TAXPAYERS TO THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE, THE GLOBAL MARKETS.
THERE JUST ISN'T ANY
JUSTIFICATION FOR SPENDING AN
ADDITIONAL $300 MILLION ON TOP
OF PRIOR YEAR APPROPRIATIONS ON
WEAPONS PROGRAMS THAT AREN'T
NEEDED AND AREN'T SUITED TO OUR
CURRENT CONFLICTS ON THE WAR ON
TERROR.
IT HELPS NUCLEAR BOMBS WHICH
ORIGINALLY SET TO COST $225
12.
MILLION AND BE COMPLETED IN 20
2022.
IT WON'T BE COMPLETED UNTIL
AT THE TIME THAT THIS NUCLEAR
WARHEAD IS FINISHED, IF IT'S
FINISHED BY 202, IT MAY NOT
HAVE A DELIVERY VEHICLE.
THEN THERE IS THE W-78 LIFE
EXTENSION PROGRAM WHICH WOULD
CREATE ANOTHER NUCLEAR WARHEAD.
THIS BOONDOGGLE WAS SET TO COST
$26 MILLION AND NOW IT'S COST
OVER $5 BILLION.
WHY WOULD THIS CONGRESS APPROVE
YET ANOTHER TAXPAYER BAILOUT OF
FAILED NUCLEAR WEAPONS
TECHNOLOGY?
FINALLY, THERE IS A URANIUM
PROCESSING FACILITY WHICH WAS
SUPPOSED TO MANUFACTURE
COMPONENTS FOR NUCLEAR
WARHEADS.
THIS PROJECT WAS SUPPOSED TO
COST $1.5 BILLION.
NOW IT'S COST OVER $6.5 BILLION
AND FOUR YEARS BEHIND SCHEDULE.
FRANKLY, THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS
CAN'T AFFORD A CONGRESS THAT
KEEPS THROWING GOOD MONEY AFTER
BAD ON THESE UNNECESSARY
NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAMS.
NOW, I'M SURE THE OTHER SIDE
WILL TALK ABOUT HOW WE NEED TO
MAINTAIN OUR NUCLEAR ARSENAL,
AND THIS AMENDMENT ISN'T ABOUT
THAT.
IF THIS AMENDMENT PASSES, THE
BILL STILL APPROPRIATES OVER $7
ACTIVITIES.
BILLION FOR NUCLEAR WEAPON
IN REALITY, IT MAKES NO SENSE
TO INCREASE SPENDING ON NUCLEAR
WEAPONS.
WE'VE AGREED TO RESPONSIBLY
REDUCE OUR NUCLEAR STOCKPILE.
THIS IS NO LONGER THE ERA OF
THE COLD WAR WHERE WE HAVE
ANOTHER NATION STATE GEARING A
LARGE PERCENTAGE OF THEIR
G.N.P. TOWARDS COMPETING WITH
FRONT.
US ON THE NUCLEAR WEAPONS
WE ARE AND WILL REMAIN, EVEN
WITH THE PASSAGE OF THIS
AMENDMENT, THE GLOBAL LEADER ON
BOTH DEVELOPING AND DEPLOYING
NUCLEAR WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY.
SIMPLY ISN'T A RESPONSIBLE
WAY TO GOVERN AND REDUCES OUR
NATIONAL SECURITY, TO SPEND
MORE MONEY THAN WE CAN AFFORD
ON NATIONAL SECURITY AND TO
BORROW IT FROM COUNTRIES LIKE
CHINA, MAKES OUR NATION LESS
SECURE, NOT MORE SECURE.
I WOULD URGE THE HOUSE TO
LISTEN TO THE EXPERTS WHO ARE
TELLING US NOT TO THROW GOOD
MONEY AFTER BAD.
CONTROL.
LET'S GET OUR BUDGET UNDER
LET'S GET OUR BUDGET ON THE
RIGHT TRACK BY SPENDING MONEY
ON PROGRAMS THAT ARE PROVEN TO
PROTECT OUR COUNTRY, NOT ON
BOONDOGGLES THAT CONTINUE TO
TOSS TAXPAYERS YEAR AFTER YEAR
AFTER YEAR WITHOUT INCREASING
OUR SECURITY.
WE NEED TO MAKE HARD CHOICES TO
GET OUR COUNTRY BACK ON THE
PATH TO FISCAL SANITY.
WELL, THIS POLIS-MARKEY
AMENDMENT IS AN EASY CHOICE.
VOTE FOR THE POLIS-MARKEY
AMENDMENT AND AGAIN SPENDING
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF
ADDITIONAL DOLLARS ON REDUNDANT
AND UNNEEDED NUCLEAR WEAPONS
TECHNOLOGY ON TOP OF THE $7
BILLION BASE INCLUDED IN THIS
BILL WHICH ALREADY ALLOWS US TO
BE THE UNCHALLENGED GLOBAL
LEADER IN DEVELOPING AND
DEPLOYING NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
I URGE A YES VOTE ON THE
POLIS-MARKEY AMENDMENT, AND I
TIME.
YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY RISE?
MOVE TO
STRIKE THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
MR.
CHAIRMAN, I RISE IN STRONG
OPPOSITION TO THIS AMENDMENT.
ASSURING FUNDING FOR THE
MODERNIZATION OF OUR NUCLEAR
WEAPONS STOCKPILE IS OUR MOST
NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE IN OUR
ENERGY AND WATER BILL.
THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY MUST
CERTIFY TO THE PRESIDENT THAT
OUR NUCLEAR STOCKPILE IS
RELIABLE.
IT'S ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL THAT
THESE FUNDS BE PUT IN THE BILL
BILL.
WET YEARS OF LEVEL FUNDING THAT
-- WITH THE YEARS OF LEVEL
FUNDING THAT WE PUT ON, THAT'S
WHY THE 2010 NUCLEAR POSTURE
REVIEW CONCLUDED THAT
ADDITIONAL FUNDING WAS
ESSENTIAL TO ENSURE THAT OUR
INFRASTRUCTURE WAS ADEQUATELY
MAINTAINED AND THAT OUR
REFURBISHMENT IT NEEDS TO
WARHEADS RECEIVE THE
REMAIN RELIABLE AND EFFECTIVE.
AND THERE HAS BEEN STRONG
BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR CARRYING
OUT THE RECOMMENDED INCREASES
IN MODERNIZATION FUNDING.
THIS AMENDMENT UNACCEPTABLY
STRIKES FUNDING FOR THESE WHICH
ARE URGENT AND LONG OVERDUE.
I STRONGLY URGE MY COLLEAGUES
TO MAKE DEFENSE A PRY ARE THE
AND TO VOTE NO ON -- PRIORITY
AND TO VOTE NO ON THIS
AMENDMENT AND I YIELD BACK THE
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM MASSACHUSETTS
RISE?
MOVE TO STRIKE THE
REQUISITE NUMBER OF WORDS.
THE GENTLEMAN MOVES
TO STRIKE THE REQUISITE NUMBER
OF WORDS AND IS RECOGNIZED FOR
FIVE MINUTES.
I RISE IN SUPPORT
OF THE POLIS AMENDMENT.
HE AND I ARE MAKING THIS
AMENDMENT SO THAT WE CAN ONCE
AGAIN DEMONSTRATE THE LACK OF
COMPATIBILITY OF THE PRIORITIES
OF THIS BUDGET TO THE OVERALL
WELL-BEING OF OUR COUNTRY.
AGO.
THE COLD WAR ENDED 20 YEARS
WE WON AND SINCE THAT TIME,
THERE HAS BEEN A DRAMATIC
REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF
NOUCK WEAPONS THAT BOTH THE
UNITED STATES AND -- NUCLEAR
WEAPONS THAT BOTH THE UNITED
STATES AND THE FORMER SOVIET
UNION DEPLOY.
THAT NUMBERS CONTINUE TO DROP,
AND YET HERE IN THIS BUDGET
THERE IS ADDITIONAL PROFLIGATE
SPENDING ON NEW NUCLEAR WEAPONS
PROGRAMS, WEAPONS
MODERNIZATION.
WELL, LET ME JUST SAY THIS,
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, EACH
NUCLEAR SUBMARINE THAT THE
UNITED STATES HAS HAS 96
INDEPENDENTLY TARGETABLE
NUCLEAR WARHEADS.
THAT MEANS THAT EVERY SINGLE
NUCLEAR COMMANDER OF A
SUBMARINE IN THE UNITED STATES
CAN DESTROY THE ENTIRE COUNTRY
OF RUSSIA, CAN DESTROY THE
ENTIRE COUNTRY OF CHINA.
EACH AMERICAN NUCLEAR SUBMARINE
COMMANDER, AND NEITHER RUSSIA
NOR CHINA KNOWS WHERE THOSE
SUBMARINES ARE.
WE SHOULD BE PROUD OF
OURSELVES.
WE ARE 10 FEET TALL COMPARED TO
THE RUSSIANS, COMPARED TO THE
CHINESE, AND BY THE WAY, ANY
PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE WITH IRAN
OR SYRIA IN TERMS OF RUSSIAN
SUPPORT FOR THEM OR CHINESE
SUPPORT FOR THEM, THEY HAVE
NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR NUCLEAR
WEAPONS CAPABILITY.
THAT'S NOT INFLUENCING THEM ONE
WAY OR THE OTHER.
AND IF WE NEEDED TO EVER DROP A
NUCLEAR BOMB ON ANY ONE OF OUR
ENEMIES, LET'S JUST SAY WE HAD
A WAR WITH IRAN, AFTER THE
NUCLEAR SUB COMMANDER IN THE
UNITED STATES NAVY SENT ONE
NUCLEAR WEAPON TOWARDS TEHRAN,
WHAT WOULD THE NEXT TARGET BE?
WHAT ARE WE DOING OUT HERE?
WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT
ADDITIONAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN
THE 21ST CENTURY?
WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT
CUTTING MEDICARE, CUTTING
MEDICAID, CUTTING PROGRAMS FOR
CHILDREN, CUTTING
NUTRITION PROGRAMS FOR POOR
CHILDREN AND AT THE SAME TIME
NUCLEAR WEAPONS?
SAYING THAT WE NEED MORE
THIS IS A WAY BACK MACHINE,
IT'S A COLD WARTIME MACHINE
THAT BASICALLY SAYS THAT -- WAR
TIME MACHINE THAT BASICALLY THE
EXTRA CAPITAL MADE CONTINUES TO
DRIVE THE INVESTMENTS OF THE
FUTURE, THAT WE AREN'T GOING TO
STEP BACK AND RE-EVALUATE THAT
WE WON THE COLD WAR, THAT WE
ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE A NUCLEAR
WAR WITH RUSSIA, THAT WE ARE
NOT GOING TO HAVE A NUCLEAR WAR
WITH RUSSIA, THAT WE ARE 10
FEET ALL.
AND EVEN IFER COUNTRY
UNDERSTANDS IT'S A -- IF EVERY
COUNTRY UNDERSTANDS IT'S A
TOTAL ANNIHILATION, VOTE AYE ON
THE POLIS AMENDMENT.
SEND A SIGNAL TO THE WORLD,
SEND A SIGNAL TO OUR OWN PEOPLE
THAT AT LEAST WE CAN FIND SOME
EXPENDITURE IN THE DEFENSE
BUDGET WHICH WE CAN CUT, WHICH
IS NOT RELATED TO OUR NATIONAL
SECURITY.
THAT'S ALL THAT WE ASK FROM
YOU, SO PLEASE ON ONE VOTE, ON
THE NUCLEAR WEAPONS ISSUE WHERE
WE DON'T NEED NEW WEAPONS, THAT
THERE IS A VOTE FOR SANITY,
THAT THERE IS A VOTE THAT WE
SEND AS YOU A SIGNAL TO THE
REST OF THE WORLD AND TO OUR
OWN PEOPLE THAT WE UNDERSTAND
THAT THAT NUCLEAR ARMS RACE IS
OVER.
VOTE AYE ON THE POLIS
AMENDMENT.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM INDIANA
RISE?
MOVE TO STRIKE
THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I
RISE IN RELUCTANT OPPOSITION TO
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO AND
MASSACHUSETTS.
I DO BELIEVE, GIVEN THE WORK OF
THE SUBCOMMITTEE, THAT THE
DOLLARS THAT ARE CONTAINED IN
IT REPRESENT AN ATTEMPT TO
ENSURE THAT LOOKING DOWN THE
ROAD WITH THE HOPEFUL
RATIFICATION OF THE NEW START
TREATY WE WILL BE CONSISTENT
WITH THOSE FUNDING LEVELS THAT
WILL BE REQUIRED.
WHILE THE WORLD WITHOUT NUCLEAR
WEAPONS WOULD BE MY PRRCH --
PREFERENCE, WHILE THE UNITED
STATES MUST SUSTAIN ITS
CAPABILITY TODAY, WE SHOULD
MAINTAIN THE CAPABILITIES
NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT THEY
ARE SAFE AND EFFECTIVE.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MASSACHUSETTS RIGHTFULLY ASKED,
ARE THERE ANY SAVINGS THAT WE
CAN SEE UNDER THE DEFENSE
ACCOUNTS, WHETHER AT THE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE OR
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY?
I WOULD POINT OUT ONE OF THE
BUDGET.
ELIMINATIONS IN THIS YEAR'S
OUR MONEYS FOR THE CHEMICAL
RESEARCH REPLACEMENT NUCLEAR
FACILITY, AND SO I WOULD AGAIN
EMPHASIZE TO MY COLLEAGUES THAT
THE SUBCOMMITTEE TRIED TO LOOK
AT THIS ACCOUNT WITH GREAT
SPECIFICITY WHICH WOULD REMOVE
THOSE ITEMS THAT WERE NOT
NECESSARY AND TO SPEND OUR TAX
DOLLARS WISELY AND WOULD YIELD
BACK MY TIME.
THE QUESTION IS ON
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO.
SAY AYE.
THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,
THE NOES HAVE IT.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO.
MR. CHAIRMAN, ON
THAT I REQUEST A RECORDED VOTE.
THE GENTLEMAN
REQUESTS A RECORDED VOTE.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6 OF RULE
18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM COLORADO WILL BE
POSTPONED.
THE CLERK WILL CONTINUE TO
READ.
PAGE 30, LINE 14,
DEFENSE NUCLEAR
$2,283,024,000.
NONPROLIFERATION,
FOR WHAT PURPOSE
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS
RISE?
MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE AN
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
THE CLERK WILL
REPORT THE AMENDMENT.
--
THE CLERK WILL
DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 9
PRINTED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD OFFERED BY MR. BURGESS
OF TEXAS.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MINUTES ON HIS AMENDMENT.
TEXAS IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE
THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIRMAN.
THIS IS VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD STRIKE THE
$100 MILLION FROM THE NUCLEAR
NONPROLIFERATION ACCOUNT WHICH
HAS BEEN EARMARKED BY THE
COMMITTEE FOR A BAILOUT OF A
FAILING URANIUM ENRICHMENT
COMPANY.
THIS $100 MILLION COULD THEN BE
PUT TOWARD DEFICIT REDUCTION.
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH
TAKING AWAY MONEY FROM NATIONAL
SECURITY AND EVERYTHING TO DO
WITH ENDING BAILOUTS TO A
FAILED BUSINESS MODEL.
20 YEARS AGO, TWO DECADES AGO
THIS CONGRESS CREATED BY
CHARTER THE UNITED STATES
ENRICHMENT COOPERATION,
BELIEVING USEC COULD BETTER RUN
THAN THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF --
RUN THE UE RAIN YUM ENRICHMENT
THAN THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF.
HAPPENING.
YOU REALIZE THIS IS NOT
CONGRESS WAS WRONG.
SINCE THE INCEPTION, USEC HAS
SQUANDERED BILLIONS OF DOLLARS
IN FEDERAL BAILOUTS, RUNNING
THE COMPANY INTO NEAR
DECISIONS AND DARE I SAY
INSOLVENCY BECAUSE OF POOR
CORPORATE INCOMPETENCY.
THEY COME TO THE CONGRESS HAT
IN HAND BEGGING FOR MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS TO CONTINUE OPERATION
SITES THAT ARE TECHNOLOGICALLY
OUT OF DATE.
IT IS TIME THAT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT ENDED THE ENDLESS
BAILOUTS TO THIS ENTERPRISE.
MOREOVER, USEC HAS BEEN A BAD
FAITH ACTOR WITH THE MINING
INDUSTRY WHICH HAS THE RAW
MATERIALS THAT IS ENRICHED AT
THESE FACILITIES.
YOU ALWAYS ASK YOURSELF, WHO IS
LOSER?
THE WINNER AND WHO IS THE
WELL, CONGRESS SHOULDN'T PICK
WINNERS AND LOSERS.
THE LOSERS ARE THE URANIUM
MINERS THAT POPULATE THE
WESTERN -- -- THE WESTERN
UNITED STATES.
IT SIMPLY GOES TO THE DON'T OF
ENERGY, GETS A HANDOUT AND THEN
TIME AND TIME AGAIN THEY EITHER
GET DIRECT CASH PAYMENTS OR
THEY GET SPENT URANIUM TAILS.
SO THEY HAVE NO REASON TO
NEGOTIATE WITH OUR MINERS IN
THE WESTERN UNITED STATES.
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HAS A
LONG-STANDING AGREEMENT WITH
THE URANIUM MINING INDUSTRY NOT
TO DUMP MORE THAN 10% OF THE
TO USEC AT
ANY GIVEN TIME.
YET, IT BECOMES INCREASINGLY
CLEAR THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF
ENERGY IS WILLING TO IGNORE
THAT AGREEMENT AND PROVIDE THE
BAILOUT THAT USEC DESIRES.
THIS BETRAYAL OF THE MINING
INDUSTRY THREATENS THOUSANDS OF
JOBS ACROSS THE WESTERN UNITED
STATES, TEXAS, NEVADA, NEW
MEXICO, ILLINOIS AND WYOMING,
TO NAME A FEW.
MOREOVER, ARGUMENTS THAT USEC
IS THE ONLY FACILITY THAT CAN
SUPPLY IT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE IGNORES THE PLAIN
LANGUAGE OF THE WASHINGTON
TREATY AND THE U.S.-INDIA
NUCLEAR AGREEMENT.
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HAS IN
ITS POSSESSION ENOUGH HIGHLY
ENRICHED URANIUM TO LAST AT
LEAST 15 YEARS, COSTING
HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
LESS THAN THE CONTINUED
BAILOUTS OF USEC THAT THE
COUNTRY IS CURRENTLY OBLIGATED.
IT IS TIME FOR THIS CONGRESS TO
AND STOP THE CONTINUAL
BAILOUTS OF A FAILED BUSINESS
MODEL.
PROPPING UP ONE COMPANY AT THE
EXPENSE OF AMERICAN WORKERS IS
NOT HOW THIS BODY SHOULD BE
OPERATING.
WITHIN THE BAILOUT, PAY BACK
THE TREASURY, PAY DOWN OUR
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
DEFICIT, AND I YIELD BACK THE
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
MOVE TO
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY RISE?
STRIKE THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
RESPECTFULLY, A MENTION WAS
MADE OF CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS.
THERE ARE NO CONGRESSIONAL
EARMARKS IN THE ENERGY AND
WATER BILL.
THIS IS A PRESIDENTIAL
PRIORITY.
BUT THIS IS NOT A CONGRESSIONAL
EARMARK.
I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MASSACHUSETTS RISE?
I RISE IN SUPPORT OF THE
BURGESS AMENDMENT.
THE GENTLEMAN MOVES
TO STRIKE THE REQUISITE NUMBER
OF WORDS?
I MOVE TO STRIKE
THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED.
AFTER CONGRESS QUIT
SUPPORTING THEM, RELEARNED THEY
COULDN'T SURVIVE IN THE PRIVATE
SECTOR WITHOUT BAILOUTS.
WE'VE GIVEN IT FREE CENTRIFUGE
TECHNOLOGY, WE'VE GIVEN IT EWE
RAIN YUM IT CLEANS UP ANSELS AT
BELOW MARKET VALUE,
UNDERCUTTING ITS COMPETITORS.
AND WHAT'S HAPPENED?
THE ENTIRE COMPANY IS WORTH
LESS THAN THE $100 MILLION IN
THIS BILL.
THAT'S THE NEXT GIFT THIS
CONGRESS IS GIVING TO THIS
COUNTRY.
ADAM SMITH IS SPINNING IN HIS
GRAVE SO RAPIDLY RIGHT NOW HE
SOURCE.
WOULD QUALIFY AS A NEW ENERGY
THAT'S HOW VIOLATIVE OF FREE
MARKET PRINCIPLES THIS IS,
KNOWING THERE ARE OTHER
COMPANIES THAT CAN PROVIDE THE
SAME RESOURCE WITHOUT THE
GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES.
EVEN AFTER THE DEPARTMENT OF
NRNL' RECENT ANNOUNCEMENT OF
OF FREE URANIUM,
STANDARD AND POORS DOWNGRADED
IT TO JUNK BOND STATUS.
WHO INVESTS IN SOMETHING THAT
HAS ALREADY ACHIEVED JUNK BOND
STATUS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF
THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS?
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON
HERE TODAY.
FUNDING OF A COMPANY THAT IS
NOW IN JUNK BOND STATUS.
AND J.P. MORGAN, THE CREDITOR,
CONTROLS EVERY PENNY USEC
SPENDS BECAUSE IT FELT THE
COMPANY COULD NOT MANAGE IT.
WHEN I ASKED IF IT PUT
TAXPAYERS AT RISK THEY SAID YES
AND THAT EXTREME CARE SHOULD BE
TAKEN BEFORE OFFERING ANY
EXPOSURE TO THE TAXPAYER.
ARE WE FOLLOWING THE TREASURY
DEPARTMENT'S ADVICE IN NO.
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HAS
APPROVED HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS
OF -- WORTH OF SUBSIDIES FOR
AND WILL APPROVE
ANOTHER $100 MILLION BAILOUT IN
A FEW FEW DAYS AND CONGRESS HAS
BEEN CONVINCED TO INCLUDE
FUNDING IN THREE MEASURES,
INCLUDING THE $100 MILLION
CONTAINED IN THIS BILL.
WE'VE BEEN TOLD THE BAILOUT IS
ONLY ABOUT GETTING THE SUPPLIES
WE NEED FOR OUR NUCLEAR
WEAPONS.
BUT THE TREATY WE HAVE DOESN'T
PREVENT OTHER COMPANIES FROM
DOING THIS WORK.
AND EVEN IF IT DID, THERE ARE
OTHER OPTIONS.
THEY FOUND THAT DOWN BLENDING
HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM IT
ALREADY HAS WOULD COST
TAXPAYERS HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS
OF DOLLARS LESS THAN OBTAINING
THE SERVICES FROM THIS COMPANY
THIS AMENDMENT IS SUPPORTED BY
A COALITION THAT SPANS THE
POLITICAL HORIZON THAT MAKES IT
POSSIBLE FOR MR. BURGESS A VERY
CONSERVATIVE MEMBER FROM TEXAS,
TO JOIN WITH A VERY LIBERAL
CONGRESSMAN FROM MASSACHUSETTS
IN AGREING THAT THE PRAGMATIC
CENTER HERE HAS LOST ITS
BEARINGS.
IT HAS LOST TOUCH WITH THE FREE
MARKET PRINCIPLES AND AT LEAST
IF WE ARE GOING TO SUBSIDIZE
SOMETHING THAT IT'S NOT ALREADY
REACHED JUNK BOND STATUS AND
WE'RE CONTINUING TO POUR GOOD
MONEY AFTER BAD.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IN MY
OPINION IS UNACCEPTABLE, THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HAS
ALREADY GIVEN $44 MILLION FOR
THIS PROGRAM THIS YEAR AND IT
IS ABOUT TO PROVIDE ANOTHER $82
MILLION AS IT PREPARES TO BUY
THE CENTRIFUGES THAT HAVE YET
TO BE DEMONSTRATED TO WORK
PROPERLY.
THAT'S RIGHT, $126 MILLION THAT
WILL BUY CENTRIFUGES FROM A
COMPANY WHOSE TOTAL VALUE IS
NOW LESS THAN $90 MILLION.
AS PART OF THE DEAL, THE
TAXPAYERS ALSO HAVE TO ASSUME
LIABILITY FOR THE COMPANY'S
NUCLEAR WASTE.
WE SHOULD NOT BE THROWING GOOD
MONEY AFTER BAD.
SHOULD NOT BE WASTED.
THIS IS A $100 MILLION THAT
PLEASE SUPPORT THE
BURGESS-MARKEY AMENDMENT.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO
RISE?
MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE TO
STRIKE THE LAST WORD.
THE GENTLEMAN IS
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINS.
I RISE TODAY IN STRONG
OPPOSITION TO THE
BURGESS-MARKEY AMENDMENT.
PUT SIMPLY, IF THIS AMENDMENT
PASSES, OUR NATIONAL SECURITY
IS AT RISK.
THE APPROPRIATION THAT THIS
AMENDMENT SEEKS TO STRIKE IS
VITAL TO ENSURE THAT AMERICA
HAS A DOMESTIC SOURCE OF
URANIUM ENRICHMENT.
ACCORDING TO U.S. LAW AND
NONPROLIFERATION TREATIES THE
UNITED STATES ARE SIGNATORIES
TO, WE MUST HAVE A DOMESTIC
SOURCE OF URANIUM.
INTERNATIONAL
PROHIBIT US FROM
PURCHASING ENRICHED URANIUM
FROM OTHER COUNTRIES FOR
MILITARY PURPOSES.
WE WOULD NO LONG VER A DOMESTIC
SOURCE OF URANIUM AND INSTEAD
WOULD DEPEND ON A FOREIGN
COMPANY THAT HAS MANY RED FLAGS
ENRICHMENT.
IN ITS PAST FOR URANIUM
S THAT REPLAY OF OUR DEBATE IN
THE 2013 NATIONAL DEFENSE
AUTHORIZATION A FEW WEEKS AGO
TO STRIP THE AUTHORIZATION
LANGUAGE FOR THIS PROGRAM.
THAT AMENDMENT FAILED BY AN
OVERWHELMING VOTE OF 121-300.
NOTHING, I REPEAT, NOTHING HAS
CHANGED IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS
SINCE THAT VOTE AND TODAY.
MR. CHAIRMAN, SOME OF MY
COLLEAGUES ARE CLAIMING THAT
THE RD&D PROGRAM IS A
CONGRESSIONAL EARMARK BUT THIS
IS NOT TRUE.
THE PRESIDENT
ADMINISTRATION DETERMINED IT IS
NECESSARY FOR OUR NATIONAL
SECURITY.
NOW, I MAY STILL BE A FRESHMAN
BUT I KNOW ENOUGH THAT IN ORDER
TO BE A CONGRESSIONAL EARMARK,
THAT A MEMBER OF CONGRESS WOULD
NEED TO MAKE THE REQUEST FOR
THE PROGRAM.
THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
FURTHERMORE, IN THE NDAA
LEGISLATION, CHAIRMAN MCKEON
ADDED A PROVISION TO ENSURE
THAT TAXPAYERS ARE PROTECTED BY
REQUIRING ANY COMPANY THAT
PARTICIPATES IN THE R DND A DND
PROGRAM TO PUT UP THEIR
COLLATERAL.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AS
THE I.P. RIGHTS ARE WORTH
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND FAROUT
WEIGH ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MIGHT
PUT TOWARD THIS PROGRAM.
TO CALL THIS AN EARMARK OR
BAILOUT IS NOT TRUE.
HAVE ALSO TRIED TO CONFUSE
THE SPONSORS OF THE AMENDMENT
MEMBERS BY SAYING THAT WE CAN
SATISFY OUR NATIONAL SECURITY
NEEDS BY DOWN BLENDING EXISTING
URANIUM.
WHILE WE MAY BE ABLE TO DO THIS
IN THE NEAR TERM THIS ARGUMENT
IS SHORTSIGHTED AT BEST.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE
GOVERNMENT RUNS OUT OF
INVENTORY TO DOWN BLEND AND WE
NO LONG VER A DOMESTIC
CAPABILITY TO ENRICH URANIUM?
THE OTHER SIDE DOESN'T SEEM TO
HAVE A GOOD RESPONSE FOR THAT
QUESTION BECAUSE THEY KNOW THE
ANSWER.
AND THE ANSWER IS THAT WE NEED
TO GO FORWARD WITH THE RD&D
PROGRAM TO ENSURE WE HAVE A
DOMESTIC SOURCE IN THE FUTURE.
IT SEEMS SOME WOULD RATHER
IGNORE THE LONG-TERM NATIONAL
SECURITY IMPLICATIONS OF HAVING
A DOMESTIC SOURCE OF URANIUM
ENRICHMENT.
THE FACT IS, IF THIS AMENDMENT
PASS, OUR NUCLEAR NATIONAL
SECURITY COULD BE AT RISK.
I WILL ONCE AGAIN REMIND MY
COLLEAGUE THIS IS THIS
AMENDMENT ATTEMPTS TO ACHIEVE
THE SAME GOAL THAT THE FAILED
PEARCE-MARKEY AMENDMENT DID A
FEW WEEKS AGO AND WE ALREADY
KNOW THAT AMENDMENT FAILED BY A
VERY WIDE MARGIN.
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO DEFEAT
THIS AMENDMENT TO ENSURE THAT
OUR NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY
IS NOT OUTSOURCED TO A
FOREIGN-OWNED COMPANY.
AND WITH THAT, I YIELD BACK THE
BALANCE OF MY TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM INDIANA RISE?
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST
WORD.
THE SKWLELT IS --
THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR
MINUTES.
I APPRECIATE THE
RECOGNITION.
TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I DON'T
KNOW ABOUT CONSERVATIVES FROM
TEXAS OR LIBERALS FROM
MASSACHUSETTS, I'M FROM GARY,
INDIANA, AND I AM HERE SIMPLY
TO ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO NOT
FLUSH $100 MILLION DOWN A
DRAIN.
THAT WOULD BE MY TECHNICAL
ARGUMENT AND I WANT TO THANK
THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS AND I
WANT TO THANK THE GENTLEMAN
FROM MASSACHUSETTS FOR OFFERING
THIS AMENDMENT.
I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE
SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIR FOR REDUCING
THE ADMINISTRATION'S ORIGINAL
REQUEST, $150 MILLION FOR USEC,
THE UNITED STATES ENRICHMENT
CORPORATION, TO $100 MILLION
THAT IS CONTAINED IN THIS BILL.
BUT I MUST TELL YOU, I HAVE
SERIOUS DISAGREEMENT WITH THE
COMMITTEE MARK ON THIS AND DO
BELIEVE THIS AMENDMENT NEEDS TO
BE ADOPTED.
THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY WORK
TOO HARD FOR THE TAX DOLLARS
THEY SEND TO US TO FLUSH THIS
$100 MILLION DOWN A DRAIN.
IN 2008, WHEN THIS COMPANY
APPLIED FOR A LOAN GUARANTEE,
D.O.E. REQUIRED USEC TO PRODUCE
A TRACK RECORD OF RUNNING THE
CENTRIFUGES FOR A TIME
SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THEY COULD
BE COMMERCIALIZED.
THIS, WE WERE TOLD, WOULD BE
SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THE
TECHNOLOGY.
IT WAS NOT.
FURTHER, I WOULD POINT OUT,
THAT IN 2010, $45 MILLION IN
ACCOUNTING EXCHANGE NEW YORK
EXCHANGE FOR LIABILITY, FOR
ENRICHMENT SERVICES, WAS
PROVIDED TO THE COMPANY,
ESSENTIALLY FOR GIVING THEM $45
MILLION OF LIABILITY.
THIS FISCAL YEAR, 2012, $44
MILLION ADDITIONAL DOLLARS IN
EXCHANGE, RELIEVING THE COMPANY
OF LIABILITY THAT IS NOW ON THE
TAXPAYERS' BOOK, WAS PUT FORTH.
THERE IS A PROPOSAL ON THE
TABLE, SEPARATE FROM THIS BILL
AND SEPARATE FROM THIS
AMENDMENT TO DO THAT EXCHANGE
OF LIABILITY FOR ENRICHMENT
SERVICES A THIRD TIME FOR
ANOTHER $82 MILLION BECAUSE THE
COMPANY NEEDS IT.
AND THE QUESTION DURING
SUBCOMMITTEE CONSIDERATION OF
THIS ISSUE THAT WAS ADDRESSED
TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY IS,
WHAT HAPPENS TO THE TAXPAYERS?
WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS COUNTRY IF
THE COST OF CLEANING UP THOSE
EXCEED THE LIABILITY THAT WAS
GIVEN TO THE COMPANY?
THAT IS, WHAT HAPPENS IF IT'S
NOT $44 MILLION OR $45 MILLION,
WHAT IF IT'S NOT $82 MILLION?
WHAT IF IT'S $100 MILLION?
WE EAT IT.
AND THAT'S WRONG.
THAT IS WRONG.
AMENDMENT.
AND PEOPLE OUGHT TO ADOPT THIS
SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, THE CLAIM
JUST IN ANOTHER TWO
YEARS, JUST ANOTHER TWO YEARS,
AND JUST ANOTHER $300 MILLION,
WOULD PROVE THE TECHNOLOGY.
NOW, NOW, TODAY, THE DEPARTMENT
IS SAYING, THIS PROGRAM WOULD
MAKE PROGRESS, NOT PROVE THE
TECHLING IN -- TECH KNOLL, THEY
WOULD MAKE PROGRESS TOWARD
PROVING THE TECHNOLOGY.
IT WAS MENTIONED THAT ON MAY
15, THE COMPANY WAS DOWNGRADE
BY STANDARD & POOR.
LAST MONTH, USEC WAS WARNED IT
WAS IN DANGER OF DEGREE BE-- OF
BEING DELISTED BY THE U.S.
STOCK EXCHANGE.
THAT MEANS THE COMPANY'S STOCK
WOULD BE REDUCED TO
SPECULATIVE, PENNY-STOCK
STATUS, REDUCING THEIR SHARES.
LAST MONTH, THE DEPARTMENT
ATHOUNSED AGAIN THIS VERY
COMPLICATED DEAL RELATIVE TO
THE TAILINGS.
THIS DEAL TAKES THE MOST
ARGUMENT AWAY FROM
FUNDING USEC'S AMERICAN
CENTRIFUGE PROJECT.
LAST MONTH, USEC, T.V.A. AND
OTHERS REACHED A DEAL TO KEEP
THE PADUCAH INFUSION PLANT BY
REENRICHING URANIUM TAILINGS.
THE POINT I WOULD MAKE IS THAT
THE TRANSFER OF THESE TAILINGS
RESULTS IN ENOUGH U.S. OR-IN
LOW ENRICHED URANIUM FOR 15
YEARS.
IN ADDITION, THE NATIONAL
NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
CAN ASK MIX OXIDE FACILITIES
FOR BACK YUM LOW ENRICHED
URANIUM FOR 4.5 YEARS.
MR. JOHNSON TALKED ABOUT THE
LONG-TERM, THAT'S THE
LONG-TERM.
THAT'S TWO DECADES FROM NOW.
AND THE TECHNOLOGY THAT USEC IS
USING TODAY IS 20 YEARS OLD AND
THE NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION HAS NOT
EVALUATED ALTERNATIVES BUT IT
HAS THE TIME TO DO SO.
AGAIN, WE NEED TO MAKE A
DECISION HERE AND THE DECISION
OUGHT TO BE TO ADOPT THIS
AMENDMENT AND TO SAVE THE
TAXPAYERS $100 MILLION.
I YIELD BACK MY TIME.
THE TIME OF THE
GENTLEMAN HAS EXPIRED.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW MEXICO RISE?
THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR
FIVE MINUTES.
I RISE IN SUPPORT OF THE
BURGESS-MARKEY AMENDMENT.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO MY
FRIEND FROM OHIO WHO SAYS THIS
IS A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE,
THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HAS
SAID THEY HAVE ENOUGH MATERIAL
TO LAST THEM THROUGH 2050.
WE HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO START
FROM SCRATCH TO BID THE PROJECT
OUT.
IF THE CONTENTION
OF OUR FRIEND IS THAT WE MUST
HAVE A U.S. COMPANY THAT
PRODUCE THIS IS MATERIAL, THEN
START THE BID PROCESS TODAY.
WE HAVE UNTIL 2050.
ATTEMPTED FOR OVER 30
YEARS TO DEVELOP A CENTRIFUGE
AND HAS YET TO DO IT.
THEY'VE HAD OVER $5 BILLION
GIVEN TO THEM.
IF THEY GET THIS BAILOUT, THEN
THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE
OPERATIONS WITH THE REQUEST FOR
ANOTHER $2 BILLION AT WHICH
POINT ARE -- AT WHICH POINT ARE
WE, THE DESIGNATED
REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE,
GOING TO STAND AND SAY, OTHER
PEOPLE CAN DO THAT.
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY IS
SAYING THE ONLY SCIENTISTS WE
CAN FUND ARE AT USEC.
I SINCERELY DISAGREE WITH THEM.
I DO NOT BELIEVE WE SHOULD HAVE
FOREIGN-OWNED CORPORATIONS
PROVIDING THIS MATERIAL BUT WE
HAVE PLENTY OF TIME NOW IF WE
START.
WE'RE TOLD THAT WE DO NOT HAVE
THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IF WE
SOMEHOW TAKE THE FUNDS AWAY IF
WE DON'T GIVE THEM.
WHAT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IS
AVAILABLE WHEN THE COMPANY HAS
SPENT $5 BILLION TO CREATE 38
MACHINES, SIX OF WHICH HAVE HAD
CATASTROPHIC FAILURES.
THE CASE, WHICH STOPS
THE WHOLE PROGRAM BECAUSE THAT
WOULD CAUSE A LEAK OF
RADIOACTIVE MATERIALFUL IT'S
TIME FOR THE CONGRESS TO SIMPLY
SAY WHAT THEY WANT TO GO TO BID
AND ALLOW THE BEST BIDDER IN
THE NATION, THE BEST DWHORNINGE
BEST MINDS IN THE NATION TO
COME TOGETHER AND DEVELOP WHAT
STOP FUNDING A FAILED
WE WANT.
CORPORATION THAT WAS AT RISK A
MONTH AGO OF BEING PULLED OFF
THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE
THAT'S BEEN DOWNGRADED.
USEC HAS 90% OF THE WORLD
MARKET.
THEY HAVE 90% OF THE U.S.
MARKET WHEN THEY WERE GIVEN THE
COMPANY AND PRIVATIZED.
BILLION
WORTH OF PRODUCT, AND 90%
MARKET SHARE AN THEY'VE
SQUANDERED THAT MARKET SHARE
DOWN TO 10%.
THEY CRAPSED THE URANIUM
MARKET.
VIABLE COMPANY SELLS IT
WHO SELLS PRODUCT -- WHAT
THROUGHOUT THE BACK DOOR THEY
WERE GIVEN AND COLLAPSES THE
WORLD MARKET?
THAT'S THE COMPANY I'M SAYING,
THE BURGESS-MARKEY AMENDMENT
SIMPLY DOESN'T BAIL OUT.
HIMSELF $5 MILLION.
THE HEAD OF THE COMPANY PAID
TAXPAYER BAILOUT DOLLARS ARE
GOING TO PAY THE EXECUTIVES OF
THIS COMPANY ELABORATE SALARIES
ANYTHING.
WHEN THEY ARE NOT PRODUCING
IF THE COMPANY WAS GOOD AT
PRODUCING CENTRIFUGES AS IT IS
GETTING GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS,
THEY WOULD HAVE LONG AGO
SUCCEEDED IN DEVELOPING THE
CAPACITY TO MAKE CENTRIFUGES.
OTHER COUNTRIES -- OTHER
COMPANIES, OTHER NATIONS HAVE
CENTRIFUGES BY THE HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OPERATING, AND THIS
NATION AFTER $5 BILLION HAS 38
THAT DON'T OPERATE.
JUST STOP THE GAMES, STOP THE
BAILOUTS.
I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY
TIME.
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS
BACK.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.
THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT
WILL SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED WILL SAY NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,