Findings

Congress makes the following findings: (1) The United States continues to maintain an excessively large and costly arsenal of nuclear delivery systems and warheads that are a holdover from the Cold War. (2) The current nuclear arsenal of the United States includes approximately 3,748 total nuclear warheads in its military stockpile, of which approximately 1,770 are deployed with five delivery components: land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, long-range strategic bomber aircraft armed with nuclear gravity bombs, long-range strategic bomber aircraft armed with nuclear-armed air-launched cruise missiles, and short-range fighter aircraft that can deliver nuclear gravity bombs. The strategic bomber fleet of the United States comprises 87 B–52 and 20 B–2 aircraft, over 66 of which contribute to the nuclear mission. The United States also maintains 400 intercontinental ballistic missiles and 14 Ohio-class submarines, up to 12 of which are deployed. Each of those submarines is armed with approximately 90 nuclear warheads. (3) According to the Congressional Budget Office, the projected cost to sustain and modernize the United States nuclear arsenal has increased significantly. From 2025 to 2034, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the cost will be $946,000,000,000 to operate, sustain, and modernize current nuclear forces, an average of $95,000,000,000 annually. When accounting for inflation and rising program expenses, the cost could easily surpass $1,000,000,000,000 in the 10 year period after the date of the enactment of this Act. Current estimates from the Congressional Budget Office for the period between 2025 and 2034 have already ballooned by 25 percent, or $190,000,000,000, more than the 2023 estimate for the period between 2023 and 2032. Further calls to increase the nuclear arsenal would increase these projections. (4) According to the Government Accountability Office, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has still not factored affordability concerns into its planning as was recommended by the Government Accountability Office in 2017, with the warning that it is essential for NNSA to present information to Congress and other key decision makers indicating whether the agency has prioritized certain modernization programs or considered trade-offs (such as deferring or cancelling specific modernization programs). Instead, the budget estimate of the Department of Energy for nuclear modernization activities during the period of fiscal years 2021 through 2025 was $83,619,000,000—$15,410,000,000 more than the 2020 budget estimate of the Department for the same period. (5) A December 2020 Congressional Budget Office analysis showed that the projected costs of nuclear forces over the next decade can be reduced by $15,380,000,000 to $16,870,000,000 by trimming back current plans, while still maintaining a triad of delivery systems. Even larger savings would accrue over the subsequent decade. (6) The Department of Defense’s June 2013 nuclear policy guidance entitled Report on Nuclear Employment Strategy of the United States found that force levels under the April 2010 Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms between the United States and the Russian Federation (commonly known as the New START Treaty) are more than adequate for what the United States needs to fulfill its national security objectives and can be reduced by up to 1⁄3 below levels under the New START Treaty to 1,000 to 1,100 warheads. (7) President Trump expanded the role of, and spending on, nuclear weapons in United States policy at the same time that he withdrew from, unsigned, or otherwise terminated a series of important arms control and nonproliferation agreements.