Campopiano / 1 Senator Wang

S.W._____

A BILL
To decrease all public funding for the production of new nuclear weapons in the United States.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE
This act may be cited as the Nuclear Weapons Abolition Act of 2015.
SECTION 2. FINDINGS
Congress hereby finds and declares that,
1) Nuclear armed nations spend close to 300 million dollars a day on their nuclear force.
2) The United States is currently eighteen trillion dollars in debt and owes money to countries like China, Japan, and
the United Kingdom.
3) Barack Obama proposed to spend cuts for many federal programs in the 2016 budget but not on nuclear weapons.
4) Every hour, taxpayers in the United States are paying approximately two million dollars for nuclear weapons in
2015.
5) The costs for nuclear missions are expected to grow substantially over the next twenty years if each leg of the
nuclear triad is modernized to replace existing nuclear systems.
6) Cecil Haney, the head of U.S. Strategic Command, stated that nuclear weapons will require close to ten percent of
the Department of Defense budget for a period of time.
7) The United States possessed 4,717 active nuclear warheads as of September 30, 2014.
8) Due to the many nuclear tests, fallout has spread out and been deposited in the atmosphere all over the world,
exposing many people to the dangerous effects of nuclear fallout.
9) After the Cold War, the United States had about five to six thousand warheads in their arsenal.
10) United States nuclear weapons act as a deterrent force because American leaders can threaten to launch them in
response to nuclear attacks against U.S. territory or military forces.
11) The United States spends more money on nuclear weapons than all other countries combined.
12) Congressional Budget Office estimates that over the 2015-2024 period, the Administrations plans for nuclear
forces would cost 348 billion dollars, an average of about 35 billion dollars a year, and an amount that is close to the
Congressional Budget Offices December 2013 estimate of 355 billion dollars for the 2014-2023 period.
13) Current nuclear forces include submarines that launch ballistic missiles, land-based intercontinental ballistic
missiles long-range bombers, and the nuclear weapons they carry.
14) In the past three years, the budget for simply maintaining nuclear warheads and production facilities has seen a
sixteen percent increase
SECTION 3. STATUTORY LANGUAGE
A) The Nuclear Weapons Abolition Act of 2015 shall hereby decrease the public funding for new nuclear weapons in
the United States. Taxes already collected for the production of nuclear weapons shall not be used to help fund the
development of nuclear weapons, but instead help fund other areas of the government, such as education, Medicare,
food and agriculture, and science. Decreasing the taxes will be completed as followed: (1) Have congress decrease the
money that has been funding the military, more specifically the nuclear weapons developments. 2) Transfer the funds
and split it equally among the other areas of government in need of funding.
B) The Department of Defense will be responsible to ensure that the taxes used for nuclear weapons are decreased
from its original amount. If it is found that taxes are not yet decreased, the Department of Defense will be fined an
additional million dollars per day. The funding will be decrease to five billion dollars annually. The rest of the money
will be equally distributed to areas of government that are low in funds and are in need of money like education,
healthcare, food and agriculture, etc.
C) The Nuclear Weapons Abolition Act of 2015 shall be enacted on January 1, 2016. There is no expiration for this
bill.

In the mid 1900s, the United States had begun the infamous arms race against the Soviet Union, and Germany. The U.S.
competed for nuclear supremacy and started the Manhattan Project, a project focused on the development of an atomic bomb in order to
challenge the Axis powers. By being the first to develop the atom bomb, it would encourage both defense and deterrence (Sagan &
Waltz 1). During this period, the United States needed these weapons to protect itself, but in todays world of new technology and other
means of defense, the use for nuclear weapons has faded. It has become a nuisance to continually fund nuclear weapons with tax dollars
and see no use for these weapons of mass destruction. Which is why removing the funding for nuclear weapons would be the smart
decision for the U.S to make. Public funding for nuclear weapons should be eliminated because every hour taxpayers are paying
approximately two million dollars per year to fund weapon development, citizens could be prone to the nuclear fallout, and the money
could be better spent on other areas besides the military.
Every year tax revenue is gathered from the public to help support government resources. The money goes toward Medicare and
health, education, food and agriculture, military and more. However, a majority of that tax revenue goes toward the Department of
Defense and funds projects and developments such as weapons of mass destructions (Federal Spending: Where Does the Money Go,
Discretionary Spending). It is predicted that over the next ten years, the United States will have spent about 355 billion dollars toward
ballistic submarines, land based intercontinental missiles, and long-range bombers ("Projected Costs of U.S. Nuclear Forces, 2015 to
2024). As of today, the United States is in a debt totaling in at eighteen trillion dollars (The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It). By
eliminating the money that funds the development of nuclear weapons that currently have no usage, the United States could use the money
to repay this debt and slowly pay it off. Things like mortgage rates and tax could be reduced if this debt is repaid, however, it is only
getting increasingly worse.
Nuclear weapons have not only made an impact on the United States economy but an impact on the publics lives as well. When
nuclear weapons are used in cases such as Hiroshima or testing for effects, it can affect the health of people due to fallout. Nuclear fallout
is the particles of matter in the air made radioactive from a nuclear explosion. Some of these particles fall in the immediate area and some
get blown by upper winds many thousands of miles (Nuclear Fallout, Fallout). The effects of nuclear fallout include severe diarrhea,
intestinal bleeding, loss of fluids, cancer and of course, death. Due to the many nuclear tests many of these particles have traveled
throughout the States. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Radioactive fallout was deposited all over the world,
so many people were exposed to it. Even today, radioactive fallout is present in all parts of the world in small amounts. People that were
alive in 1951 in the United States received some exposure to these particles and some of these people may have an increased risk of cancer
due to this. If the United States continues to test nuclear weapons, than citizens today would be at this increased risk of cancer.
Eliminating funding for nuclear weapons could prevent any more nuclear fallout from occurring in the future and guarantee our safety
from the threats of nuclear fallout.
With as many casualties from nuclear weapons as there are, it would be in the United States best interest to remove them. One
way to reduce the drastic casualties is by removing the source that funds them. As stated earlier, taxpayers pay approximately two million
dollars a year to fund these weapons as of 2015. A massive chunk of money is allocated to the militarys Department of Defense and very
little of it is allocated toward education, foods and agriculture, Medicare and health, energy and environment, or veterans benefits. In
2015, approximately more than half a trillion dollars was given to the military and the other half was spread among the other categories
(Federal Spending: Where does the Money Go, Discretionary Spending). If the United States were to eliminate the money funding the
development of nuclear weapons, it could help other areas that are in need of more money. For example Medicare is one of the categories
that doesnt receive enough money. The United States is the only major nation in the industrialized world that does not guarantee health
care as a right to its people, stated by Bernie Sanders (On 50th Anniversary of Medicare, Sanders Proposes Medicare-for-All). With this
amount of money the United States could bring a fundamental change to the American health care system. This is just one of many
examples that could benefit from the money that comes from eliminating the funding for nuclear weapons.