Brian Bradley
NS&D Monitor
6/12/2015
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) this week blocked a proposed amendment to the Senate version of the Fiscal Year 2016 National Defense Authorization Act that would have prevented the Obama Administration from moving forward with a plan to accelerate dismantlement of retired nuclear weapons. Using a procedural move during floor debate on the defense bill, Feinstein rebuffed Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-Ark.) amendment that proposed limiting retired warhead dismantlement funding to $50 million per year for the next five fiscal years. Feinstein objected to entering the amendment into the act’s voting queue. “In order for an amendment to be voted on, it must first be made pending, which is usually done by unanimous consent,” a Congressional staffer told NS&D Monitor. “In this case, Senator Feinstein objected to making it pending, so the amendment cannot be voted upon.”
During floor debate, Cotton criticized the Obama Administration’s plan to accelerate the dismantlement of nuclear warheads by 20 percent. “Beyond obsolete or outdated warheads, I do not believe that is a priority,” said Cotton. “Nuclear modernization is a priority. We should not be accelerating our nuclear disarmament by up to 20 percent because it would send the exact wrong message to Russia, other adversaries, and our allies. Russia is making overt nuclear threats to the United States and our allies, and we are going to accelerate our unilateral nuclear disarmament? That defies logic.”
However, Feinstein said the language in the Cotton amendment “unnecessarily limits” the National Nuclear Security Administration’s ability to take apart approximately 2,400 retired nuclear warheads that await dismantlement and serve no national defense purpose. “The administration has committed accelerating dismantlement and we should support its goals of eliminating redundant nuclear weapons,” said Feinstein. “I see no reason to imply congressional disapproval for this effort and to micromanage NNSA’s weapons activity.” Cotton had said the “important issue” should have been called up for a vote, adding that Feinstein should “not object to an amendment simply being brought to the floor to be debated.”
