III 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 633 

Expressing the sense of the Senate on the plan of the Department of Defense 

and the Department of Energy for modernizing the nuclear weapons 

of the United States. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 9, 2016 

Mr. FRANKEN (for himself, Mr. SANDERS, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, Ms. WARREN, 

Mr. MARKEY, Mr. MERKLEY, Ms. BALDWIN, Mr. SCHATZ, Mr. WYDEN, 

Mrs. BOXER, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. BROWN, and Mr. MURPHY) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Armed 

Services 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the Senate on the plan of the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy 

for modernizing the nuclear weapons of the United 

States. 

Whereas nuclear war poses the gravest risk to the national 

security of the United States; 

Whereas, as of 2016, the United States maintains a force of 

approximately 7,000 nuclear weapons, either active, on 

reserve, or waiting for dismantlement; 

Whereas the Department of Defense and the Department of 

Energy are planning an extensive and costly program to 

‘‘modernize’’ the nuclear weapons of the United States; 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 633 IS 

Whereas there is substantial controversy over whether the nuclear modernization plan goes beyond assuring that the 

United States nuclear deterrent is safe, secure, and reliable to defend the United States and allies of the United 

States, and is instead a plan for the development of an 

even more powerful nuclear arsenal that lacks sufficient 

cost analysis or decisions on priorities; 

Whereas the nuclear modernization plan was launched in a 

different budget era before the enactment of the Budget 

Control Act of 2011 (Public Law 112–25; 125 Stat. 

240), which includes budget caps; 

Whereas there is widespread agreement that the United 

States should retain a robust nuclear arsenal to deter a 

nuclear attack on the United States or allies of the 

United States; 

Whereas, if the nuclear modernization plan is followed, the 

United States would face a ‘‘modernization mountain’’ of 

the heightened expenses associated with developing and 

procuring 12 SSBN(X) nuclear submarines, as many as 

100 long-range strike bombers, a new nuclear-tipped 

cruise missile, and 642 intercontinental ballistic missiles 

and nuclear weapons all at the same time; 

Whereas the total cost to develop, procure, and maintain such 

an enhanced nuclear arsenal over the next 3 decades has 

been estimated at up to $1,000,000,000,000; 

Whereas, if all those nuclear weapons programs move forward 

at their estimated cost, other priorities may suffer, including the fight against international terrorism, the purchase of conventional weapons, and training and maintenance of troops; 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 633 IS 

Whereas a 2014 review by the National Defense Panel, led 

by former Secretary of Defense William Perry and retired 

United States Army General John Abizaid, concluded, 

‘‘Recapitalization of all three legs of the nuclear Triad 

with associated weapons could cost between $600 billion 

and $1 trillion over a thirty year period, the costs of 

which would likely come at the expense of needed improvements in conventional forces.’’; 

Whereas Brian McKeon, the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, noted, ‘‘We’re looking at 

that big bow wave and wondering how the heck we’re 

going to pay for it, and probably thanking our lucky 

stars we won’t be here to answer the question.’’; 

Whereas Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) Mike 

McCord expressed his concern over the costs of the nuclear refurbishment program, saying, ‘‘I don’t know of a 

good way for us to solve this issue.’’, while noting that 

it will be a major challenge for the next President; 

Whereas Todd Harrison of the Center for Strategic and 

International Studies pointed out that with a nuclear 

modernization bow wave facing the United States, the 

next President ‘‘will need to make many difficult choices 

to rationalize long-term defense modernization plans with 

the resources available’’; and 

Whereas former Secretary of Defense Perry stated at a July 

2016 hearing, ‘‘I do not believe we should simply modernize all systems that we built during the Cold War.’’: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the 

2 President should— 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4 

•SRES 633 IS 

1 (1) take action to ensure the affordability and 

2 feasibility of the plan of the Department of Defense 

3 and the Department of Energy for modernizing the 

4 nuclear weapons of the United States by reevalu5 ating, and modifying accordingly, proposals for pro6 grams to modernize United States nuclear weapons 

7 and delivery systems for such weapons with the goal 

8 of ensuring that such proposals focus on refurbish9 ment to ensure security and safety as well as effi10 ciency of existing weapons and delivery systems; and 

11 (2) prioritize among any programs that are 

12 planned so that the United States retains a nuclear 

13 arsenal robust enough to meet deterrence needs and 

14 so that such programs do not jeopardize other eco15 nomic investments and other security expenditures 

16 appropriate to the needs of the United States in the 

17 21st century, including responses to conventional 

18 and nonconventional threats. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS