Peter Visclosky: “I do rise in respectful opposition to the gentleman's amendment. The fact is we ought to ensure our security as a…”

“I do rise in respectful opposition to the gentleman's amendment. The fact is we ought to ensure our security as a Nation. To best do that, we need to develop, in a bipartisan fashion, in a fashion that exists over a number of administrations, over a number of Congresses regardless of who and which party controlled both those branches of government, a comprehensive post-Cold War, post-9/11 nuclear strategy. My concern, because that $6 billion that the chairwoman accurately suggests we do spend on a nuclear weapons complex, is a complex that we have to re-examine and to characterize. If we begin the construction of a new weapon in place, we simply exacerbate the current problems. In the end, we ought to develop a strategy and then determine the types and the numbers of weapons we need. And not just in the sense of nuclear, but conventional, as well as other aspects of what that plan should be as opposed to having a set number of weapons and of various types and then constructing a strategy around them. I would ask my colleagues to oppose the gentleman's amendment.”