On the recordJuly 12, 2000
I believe the proposed amendment on testing of our National Missile defense system is overly broad, unnecessary, and counterproductive. The amendment asks that we direct the Defense Department to conduct testing of our National Missile Defense system against--and I quote-- ``any countermeasures (including decoys) that . . . are likely, or at least realistically possible, to be used against the system.'' And it defines a countermeasure as ``any deliberate action taken by a country with long-range ballistic missiles to defeat or otherwise counter a United States National Missile Defense system.'' With language as broad as this, there is virtually no bound to what we would be directing the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, as a matter of law, to go off and test against. I don't believe it is useful to legislate such broad and open-ended requirements. Nor is it necessary. There is already a process in place to ensure that the National Missile Defense system--like every other weapon system we have--is properly tested against the likely threats if faces, including potential countermeasures.
Source
govinfo.gov




