On the recordJuly 18, 2012
Normally the committee is given the courtesy of seeing amendments that come to the floor. This is the third time today, I believe, the gentleman from Massachusetts has shown a lack of courtesy in letting the committee have copies of his amendments. Let me say, as a Nation, we still believe in a nuclear deterrent. The last time I checked, there was bipartisan support for that. Both Mr. Visclosky and I serve on the Energy and Water Subcommittee, and part of our jurisdiction is to make sure that the President of the United States, our Commander in Chief, verifies that we have nuclear capabilities. The last time I checked, the administration was conducting what we call a Nuclear Posture Review relative to what our position should be in negotiations with other nuclear powers in terms of the type of weapons that are so critical to the nuclear triad. So, with all due respect to the gentleman from Massachusetts, who referred to a lot of what we said as the fantasy land of our bill, it would be good, actually, for the Members of Congress to have some facts from the Nuclear Posture Review before we consider something here which might put our Nation at risk. I strongly oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do so as well. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey). The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.
