John McCain

Missile defense doesn't harm anybody's deterrence, it harms the ability of countries for first strike.

There are compelling reasons for the Senate to give its consent to ratification of the New START treaty.

Mr. D'Agostino, is the fiscal year 2011 and the future years budget plan sufficient to support the fiscal year 2017 delivery of the B-61 and to maintain the W-76 schedule?

What would the consequences of denying such a request have on meeting the critical 2017 deadline?

Senator McCain. General Chilton, how confident are you that it will be available as scheduled in 2017?

General Chilton, the development of the dual-capable, nuclear and conventional, variant of the F-35 to replace aging dual-capable F-16s is a primary driver for the B-61's 2017 deadline.

Under the treaty, any missile can carry any number of warheads, as long as the total does not exceed 1,550, but it's unclear as to how we will verify this number.

General Chilton, have you also conducted a net assessment to determine if the United States can carry out its deterrence mission under a likely mixed Russian strategic and tactical nuclear weapons force structure?

Is there any likelihood of the B-61 production slipping as a result of budget issues in fiscal years 2010-2012?

How critical is the timely approval of this reprogramming request?

Dr. Miller, irrespective of threats from the Russians to withdraw from the treaty, is this administration committed to funding, developing, and deploying all elements of the PAA for missile defense in Europe as well as implementing the…

General Chilton, have you yet estimated how the Russians will configure their strategic forces under the New START?

The 1251 report outlined a baseline nuclear force structure which specifies retaining up to 420 deployed ICBMs, a cut of at least 30 silos; up to 60 nuclear-capable bombers, a reduction of 34; and all of the current 14 ballistic missile…

The United States missile defense system would be employed to defend the United States against limited missile launches and defend its deployed forces.

I always believed in all the treaties that I've been involved in in the past 28 years, General, that cheating does matter, that it does have an effect.

Last month General Chilton stated that it was not only important, but essential, that the President committed to ensuring NNSA receive the full $624 million increase as proposed in his fiscal year 2011 budget.

If we don't care whether they cheat or not, it has very little effect, why have a treaty?

If it's that essential, if the cut remains in the final appropriations bill, would you recommend a veto by the President?

He would not have agreed, in my view, to two conflicting statements being the result of an agreement.

What this brings to the casual observer's mind, General, is if it doesn't have any consequences if they do any cheating, what's the point in having a treaty?

The continued success of the stockpile stewardship is threatened by lack of program stability, placing any LEP strategy at risk.

Could a decision to defer work, some of which is directly related to facility maintenance and repair, affect your ability to fulfill your mission?

I understand that the laboratories and plants have identified a shortfall of approximately $400 million above the requested fiscal year 2011 budget request.

Do such shortfalls raise concerns that you are not finding all the problems?

The reprogramming request was approved by the four relevant congressional committees in August.