A bill to preserve the ability of the United States to project power globally.

Summary: Preserving Future United States Capability to Project Power Globally Act of 2009 - States that it is the policy of the United States to: (1) pursue a development program for the next generation bomber during FY2010, in accordance with guidance established in the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review, including full authorization and appropriation of appropriate funds; and (2) not delay the next generation bomber development program by deliberations on the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, deliberations on the Nuclear Posture Review, or negotiations over the follow-on Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START).

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Preserving Future United States 
Capability to Project Power Globally Act of 2009''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress makes the following findings:
            (1) Long-range strike is a critical mission in which the 
        United States needs to retain a credible and dominant 
        capability.
            (2) Long range, penetrating strike systems provide--
                    (A) a hedge against being unable to obtain access 
                to forward bases for political reasons;
                    (B) a capacity to respond quickly to contingencies 
                such as the failure of a nuclear-armed state;
                    (C) the ability to base outside the reach of 
                emerging adversary anti-access and area-denial 
                capabilities; and
                    (D) the ability to impose disproportionate 
                defensive costs on prospective adversaries of the 
                United States.
            (3) The 2006 Quadrennial Review directed the United States 
        Air Force to ``develop a new land-based, penetrating long range 
        strike capability to be fielded by 2018''.
            (4) Secretary of Defense Robert P. Gates has publicly 
        acknowledged the need for a next generation bomber on at least 
        three separate occasions:
                    (A) In a September 29, 2008, speech at National 
                Defense University, where Secretary Gates said, ``In 
                the case of China, investments in cyber-and anti-
                satellite warfare, anti-air and anti-ship weaponry, 
                submarines, and ballistic missiles could threaten 
                America's primary means to project power and help 
                allies in the Pacific: our bases, air and sea assets, 
                and the networks that support them. This will put a 
                premium on America's ability to strike from over the 
                horizon, employ missile defenses, and will require 
                shifts from short-range to longer-range systems such as 
                the next generation bomber.''
                    (B) In the January/February 2009 edition of Foreign 
                Affairs, in an article entitled, ``A Balanced Strategy; 
                Reprogramming the Pentagon for a New Age,'' where 
                Secretary Gates wrote, ``In the case of China, 
                Beijing's investments in cyberwarfare, antisatellite 
                warfare, antiaircraft and antiship weaponry, 
                submarines, and ballistic missiles could threaten the 
                United States' primary means to project its power and 
                help its allies in the Pacific: bases, air and sea 
                assets, and the networks that support them. This will 
                put a premium on the United States' ability to strike 
                from over the horizon and employ missile defenses and 
                will require shifts from short-range to longer-range 
                systems, such as the next generation bomber.''
                    (C) In the First Quarter 2009 edition of Joint 
                Force Quarterly, in an article entitled, ``The National 
                Defense Strategy; Striking the Right Balance,'' where 
                Secretary Gates wrote, ``In the case of China, 
                investments in cyber and antisatellite warfare, anti-
                air and anti-ship weaponry, submarines, and ballistic 
                missiles could threaten America's primary means to 
                project power and help allies in the Pacific: our 
                bases, air and sea assets, and the networks that 
                support them. This will put a premium on America's 
                ability to strike from over the horizon and employ 
                missile defenses; and it will require shifts from 
                short-range to longer range systems such as the next 
                generation bomber.''
            (5) On April 6, 2009, Secretary Gates announced that the 
        United States ``will not pursue a development program for a 
        follow-on Air Force bomber until we have a better understanding 
        of the need, the requirement and the technology''.
            (6) On May 7, 2009, President Barack Obama announced the 
        termination of the next generation bomber program in the Office 
        of Management and Budget's ``Terminations, Reductions, and 
        Savings'' document, stating that ``there is no urgent need to 
        begin an expensive development program for a new bomber'' and 
        that ``the future bomber fleet may not be affordable over the 
        next six years.''
            (7) The need, requirement, and the technology for the next 
        generation bomber are well understood, as set out by the 2006 
        Quadrennial Defense Review.
            (8) The need for a new long-range strike capability is 
        urgent because the conflicts of the future will likely feature 
        heavily defended airspace, due in large part to the 
        proliferation of relatively inexpensive, but extremely 
        sophisticated and deadly, air defense systems.
            (9) General Michael Maples, Director of the Defense 
        Intelligence Agency, noted during a March 10, 2009, Committee 
        on Armed Services of the Senate hearing on worldwide threats 
        that ``Russia, quite frankly, is the developer of most of those 
        [advanced air defense] systems and is exporting those systems 
        both to China and to other countries in the world''.
            (10) The commanders of Pacific Command, Strategic Command, 
        and Joint Forces Command have each testified in support of the 
        capability that the next generation bomber will provide before 
        the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.
            (11) Nearly half of the United States bomber inventory (47 
        percent) pre-dates the Cuban Missile Crisis.
            (12) The only air-breathing strike platforms the United 
        States possesses today with reach and survivability to have a 
        chance of successfully executing missions more than 1,000 
        nautical miles into enemy territory from the last air-to-air 
        refueling are 16 combat ready B-2 bombers.
            (13) The B-2 was designed in the 1980s and achieved initial 
        operational capability over a decade ago.
            (14) The crash of an operational B-2 during takeoff at Guam 
        in early 2008 indicates that attrition can and does occur even 
        in peacetime.
            (15) The primary mission requirement of the next generation 
        bomber is the ability to strike targets anywhere on the globe 
        with whatever weapons the contingency requires.
            (16) The requisite aerodynamic, structural, and low-
        observable technologies to develop the next generation bomber 
        already exist in fifth-generation fighters.
            (17) A decision to terminate or delay the next generation 
        bomber would severely diminish the ability of the United States 
        to project power on a global scale in the future.

SEC. 3. STATEMENT OF POLICY ON CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEXT 
              GENERATION BOMBER IN FISCAL YEAR 2010.

    It is the policy of the United States--
            (1) to pursue a development program for the next generation 
        bomber during fiscal year 2010, in accordance with the guidance 
        established in the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review, including 
        the full authorization and appropriation of appropriate funds; 
        and
            (2) not to delay the next generation bomber development 
        program by deliberations on the 2010 Quadrennial Defense 
        Review, deliberations on the Nuclear Posture Review, or 
        negotiations over the follow-on Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty 
        (START).