U.S. Warhead Funding Threatened

Congressional displeasure with Bush administration plans for the U.S. nuclear weapons production complex could threaten funding for plans to develop a new nuclear warhead, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Sunday (see GSN, Jan. 8).

The Complex 2030 plan to update the U.S. nuclear complex calls for developing new warheads to replace aging weapons in the atomic arsenal.

The National Nuclear Security Administration, under the plan, would keep nuclear production operations at several sites spread across the United States.

Representative David Hobson (R-Ohio) helped develop the Reliable Replacement Warhead program and has been a leading supporter in Congress.  He also has favored consolidating nuclear weapons production in one plant in hopes of creating a smaller and more efficient nuclear complex.

“Let me make my position clear,” Hobson wrote in a Nov. 16 letter to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman.  “If the department is not willing to conduct a thorough and objective analysis of all reform alternatives including the [Consolidated Nuclear Production Complex], and instead is determined to conduct an obviously prejudicial process aimed at ensuring the department’s preferred outcome, then I will not support funding for the Complex 2030 efforts, including the Reliable Replacement Warhead program.”

At that time, Hobson led the House Appropriations subcommittee with authority over the nuclear weapons budget.  His replacement as subcommittee chairman under the Democratic-led Congress, Representative Pete Viclosky (D-Ind.), appears of a like mind on this issue, the Chronicle reported.

“It is fair to say that every option is on the table regarding funding” of the Reliable Replacement Warhead program, said Viclosky spokesman Justin Kitsch.

A recent study found that the plutonium cores of nuclear warheads could last for at least 85 years, rather than 45 to 60 years as previously believed (see GSN, Nov. 30, 2006).  That undermines the government’s credibility as it makes the case for the Reliable Replacement Warhead, Hobson said.

“They’ve been running with RRW like you wouldn’t believe,” he said.  “They see this as a big pot of money to get into.  This shows we can take a breather for a while” (James Sterngold, San Francisco Chronicle, Jan. 14).

Back to top
About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines © Copyright 2008 by National Journal Group, Inc. The material in this section is produced independently for NTI by National Journal Group, Inc. Any reproduction or retransmission, in whole or in part, is a violation of federal law and is strictly prohibited without the consent of the National Journal Group, Inc. All rights reserved.