J. Exon

Mr. EXON

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk in behalf of Senator Simon, and I ask for its consideration.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Simon, I offer this amendment which would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to convey real property and military family housing at the former Fort Sheridan, IL, to a competitive bidder in exchange for a parcel of real property and a newly constructed Navy neighborhood of excellence; and, two, authorize the Secretary of the Army to convey real property at former Fort Sheridan, IL, to a competitive bidder in exchange for a parcel of real property and newly constructed Army Reserve facilities. These property changes are at fair market value. Mr. President, I believe this amendment has been cleared on both sides.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I think this is a very worthy amendment offered by Senator Domenici. We have accepted this on this side and I urge its adoption.

Mr. EXON. I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senators Pryor, Feinstein, and Boxer, and ask for its consideration.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. EXON. I agree.

Mr. EXON. May I inquire of my colleague from South Carolina if he is prepared, as a manager of the bill, to proceed with the 20-odd amendments that I understand have been offered and have been cleared on both sides. We are prepared to take those matters up now, if it is the will of the chairman.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. EXON. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I believe this amendment has been cleared by the other side.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I would like to say we are making good progress, working back and forth on both sides. I think with a little cooperation here and a little cooperation there, this whole proposition might move much more expeditiously than we had earlier anticipated. I thank my friend and colleague from South Carolina for his usual good cooperation, and we are going to be working very hard the rest of the day to try to eliminate any and all barriers to cut down the time dramatically and probably come to a resolution, hopefully, on the authorization and the appropriations bills early this evening, and I [[Page S 12533]] emphasize the word ``early'' this evening, which I think would be good news for all. Amendment No. 2429 (Purpose: To amend the hydronuclear provisions of S. 1026)

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, this is a matter that myself, Senator Hatfield, and many other Senators have put in a great deal of time and effort on. I think this is a compromise amendment that has a chance of being accepted on both sides. Therefore, we have set aside the hour and a half, if I remember the figures correctly, that we agreed to in the unanimous-consent request. In any event, at the present time I yield such time as is assigned to me in the unanimous-consent agreement for the following remarks.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, before the August recess, a number of amendments to the Defense authorization bill were debated at length. One of these was an amendment proposed by myself, Senator Hatfield, and nine other Senators to delete the $50 million add-on to the bill for hydronuclear weapons testing. While that amendment failed, I strongly feel that the Senate should revisit the issue in a different form so that it may be clarified in light of President Clinton's recent decision to forgo such tests. Therefore, Mr. President, I would emphasize that the amendment that I have just offered and has just been read by the clerk is an amendment that I believe goes a long way in clarifying the situation for all concerned. And I firmly believe that it is simply a restatement, a punctuation mark, if you will, with the wording that was agreed to on matters in this regard in the Defense authorization bill as it came out of the Armed Services Committee. The Defense authorization in its present form contains section 3135, a provision authorizing $50 million for preparation for the commencement of hydronuclear tests. As my colleagues may know, the United States has been negotiating a comprehensive test ban treaty with the world's nuclear powers for the past 2 years. President Clinton's August 11 announcement to push for an international agreement by 1996 that would prohibit these types of nuclear detonations was an important development toward the goal of halting the spread of nuclear weapons around the world. I was particularly encouraged yet this morning to learn that the French President has now indicated a signal to cut dramatically short the full-scale underground nuclear testing that the French Government had proposed in the South Pacific. Things are coming together perhaps so that we can have a meeting of the minds. After over 1,100--and I emphasize 1,100--nuclear tests conducted by the United States over 50 years, the U.S. nuclear stockpile is the safest and most reliable on Earth. Computer simulation backed up with the data from these tests, not additional detonations, can maintain this high degree of confidence in the future. But a nonnuclear nation looking to obtain superpower status in the form of a nuclear bomb is unlikely to develop such a capability without the means to test these unproven weapons. A truly comprehensive and verifiable test ban treaty will be an effective tool at closing membership in the nuclear club. My amendment simply clarifies that the language in section 3135 is for test preparation--that is how it reads now, preparation--and not authority to violate the existing U.S. testing moratorium policy. My amendment reaffirms the congressional review process for new tests required by the 1992 Energy and Water Appropriations Act by adding the following simple and straightforward paragraph to the bill: I quote: Nothing in this act shall be construed as an authorization to conduct hydronuclear tests. Furthermore, nothing in this act shall be construed as amending or repealing the requirements of section 507 of Public Law 102-377. Unlike my previous amendment on hydronuclear testing, this amendment does not affect--I emphasize--does not affect the $50 million authorization in the bill presently. The Department of Energy would be allowed to spend the funds but only for the purpose stated in the bill, that being test preparation. The intent of the bill language would be made clearer by my amendment and brought into line with the administration's stated policy. The funds can be spent on Department of Energy stockpile stewardship activities but the authorization of funds in no way should be construed as a congressional authorization to conduct a test. That prerogative, as I mentioned earlier, is reserved under a reporting requirement contained in the original Hatfield-Exon- Mitchell provision to the 1992 energy and water appropriations bill, wherein the President must report to Congress and seek its approval for any new tests and provide the safety or reliability justification for such tests. There is no reason why the United States should restart nuclear weapons testing. To do so would be expensive, end up scuttling the comprehensive test ban negotiations, and, in a self-defeating turn, encourage other nations to pursue obtaining a nuclear capability. The preeminent nuclear weapons experts in America--if not the world--issued on August 3 of this year a study on whether we should continue nuclear weapons testing. The study, called the JASON study, was headed by Sidney Drell of Stanford and was written by 14 top scientists, including representatives from each of the national laboratories responsible for the stewardship and maintenance of these weapons. Their conclusion was unequivocal: There is no need to resume testing, including the hydronuclear tests discussed in this bill. Among the JASON report findings: The United States can, today, have high confidence in the safety, reliability, and performance margins of the nuclear weapons that are designated to remain in the enduring stockpile: A further quote from that report: A pervasive case has not been made for the utility of hydronuclear tests for detecting small changes in the performance margins for current U.S. weapons. Further quote: Underground testing of nuclear weapons at any yield below that required to initiate boosting is of limited value to the United States. Further quote: [Our] findings . . . are consistent with U.S. agreement to enter into a comprehensive test ban [CTBT] of unending duration, that includes a standard ``supreme national interest clause.'' Mr. President, these are findings of the JASON report authors--the foremost nuclear experts in the United States. They are saying, they are telling and they are advising two things of primary importance: First, that the United States does not need to test this year or the next or into the foreseeable future in order to maintain a safe and reliable nuclear arsenal. Second, they are saying that a comprehensive test ban is in our national security interests. I find it ironic that proponents of the fast-tracked national missile defense system try to justify the estimated $48 billion project by saying we can never be sure what rogue nation may develop nuclear warheads in the next century and, therefore, we must protect ourselves. A comprehensive test ban is an effective way of stemming this proliferation tide. It is a means by which to limit the have-nots from trying to find superpower status in the form of a nuclear warhead. A nation is unlikely to develop a nuclear capability with any degree of confidence if it cannot test the weapons. By the United States showing leadership and announcing [[Page S 12534]] that all tests should be banned under a comprehensive test ban treaty, the goal of nuclear nonproliferation has been greatly enhanced. Let us keep it that way. There is another reason why a comprehensive test ban treaty is beneficial for the United States. No nation has tested more than the United States and has more advanced computer technology than we do. A comprehensive test ban will lock in the technological advantages that we possess over the rest of the world. But this discussion about a comprehensive test ban treaty is all prospective. The negotiations are ongoing and no agreement has been reached as of yet. All the more reason for the Congress not to interject itself capriciously into the question of mandating weapons testing of any kind. The issue at hand is my amendment and whether the words in section 3135 of the bill mean what they say. My amendment does not touch the $50 million add-on in the bill for test preparation. It simply reiterates that ``preparation'' is different than an actual decision to test. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. I will revisit this issue at a later time. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Bingaman and Senator Lieberman be added as original cosponsors of the Exon amendment.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time. Pursuant to a previous discussion I had with my distinguished friend and colleague from South Carolina, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, I think at this time we may be in a position to proceed with the adoption of a series of amendments that I understand have been cleared on both sides.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Harkin, I offer an amendment which will reduce and refocus the reduction of the bill to the Civil Air Patrol budget from a $5 million reduction to a $2.9 million reduction. This amendment would effectively speed up the ongoing reorganization of the Civil Air Patrol so that the savings plan for 1997 would be achieved by 1996. I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. EXON. The amendment has been cleared on both sides.

Mr. EXON. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 2432 (Purpose: To provide $9,500,000 for the Joint Seismic Program and Global Seismic Network)

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Glenn, I offer an amendment to authorize $9.5 million for seismic monitoring to detect nuclear explosions. These funds would be used to continue the operation of global seismographic network operated by the consortium of American University. I believe this amendment has been cleared on the other side of the aisle.

Mr. EXON. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. EXON

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.