I would not.

I do not think that was actually in our reauthorization, but it was a consideration at that time.

Senator Inhofe.

There is an urgency here, and this is one time that I am proud of Congress, I am proud of the Senate and my colleagues and us coming together to meet a national urgency.

I think so, too.

Yes, and we appreciate it.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

This is really a big deal. This place ought to be mobbed right now.

I've been on them. What's out there that might be--that we might look at and--can you get parts for them?

A modest investment, but as you know, we have a couple that are over 70 years old still in operation today.

So what you're pointing out is that, yes, it is true that if you have to do this--but if you do it to that detail, they'll forget what the real purpose is, whether it's safety or other elements.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to be a sufficient second. The joint resolution having been read the third time, the question is, Shall the joint resolution…

That makes sense. That does. That's a good comment.

To come together to work across the aisle to create something as strong as this through a bipartisan effort is really a testimony to Congress.

I thought that our country was not leaning in to nuclear energy like we should have, that we were causing, I think, serious problems in terms of our ability to demonstrate American power.

But if that is what it takes to get you guys on board, I am all for it.

This is the equivalent of our interstate highway system, and it has 35 maintenance vehicles to maintain the entire interstate highway.

Are these platforms--even when heavily modified--capable of giving us the kind of technological overmatch to which we are accustomed?