On the recordJune 7, 2018
We voted on a similar amendment on this topic a week before last in the National Defense Authorization Act. It was defeated then, and it should be defeated now. Mr. Chairman, I think there must be some misunderstanding. We are not talking about a new weapons system. What we are talking about is taking an existing weapon and taking some of the fissile material out so that it results in a lower yield. As the chairman from Idaho pointed out, we have similar low-yield weapons that are air-delivered. The only difference here is a different delivery system through the submarines. Now, by the way, submarines already have the higher yield delivery system. We are multiplying, though, with a low yield two different delivery systems to complicate adversaries' calculations. Now, why would we want to do that? Well, it turns out the Russians have hundreds and hundreds of these lower yield weapons. And not only that, they write and speak openly about using them, even in conventional sorts of conflict. So the point of the Nuclear Posture Review is we need the full range of nuclear capability, from higher yield to lower yield, to make it clear that our nuclear deterrent is credible at every level. Whatever they may think they can get away with they cannot get away with.…
