Current U.S. plans for maintaining and modernizing the nuclear arsenal are projected to cost taxpayers roughly $355 billion in the next 10 years, Reuters reports.
That figure — produced by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office in a Friday report — constitutes a 72 percent cost spike, by some estimates. The new price tag is nearly $150 billion more than the $208.5 billion estimate the Obama administration provided to Congress in a 2012 report, according to one arms-control advocacy organization.
The United States is still in the planning stages for much of its program to replace retiring nuclear-delivery vehicles, build new fissile-material laboratories and overhaul aging warheads. Expectations are that nuclear-arsenal spending will substantially ramp-up after 2023.
Obama administration modernization plans for strategic and nonstrategic weapon delivery systems include new long-range bombers and ballistic missile-submarines, which are projected to total approximately $136 billion through 2023, according to the 25-page CBO analysis.
Energy Department plans for retrofitting warheads, building new naval reactors and constructing new fissile-material laboratories are estimated to cost $105 billion. An additional $56 billion could be spent on command-and-control technology. The CBO report also accounts for $59 billion in anticipated cost growth.
“The impending nuclear-modernization tidal wave will force increasingly difficult trade-offs between nuclear and conventional capabilities,” Kingston Reif, nuclear nonproliferation director at the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation, projected.
This article was published in Global Security Newswire, which is produced independently by National Journal Group under contract with the Nuclear Threat Initiative. NTI is a nonprofit, nonpartisan group working to reduce global threats from nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.
- 1 Bull’s Eye: Here’s the Obamas’ New Neighborhood
- 2 Without Federal Drone Rules, States Are Blazing Their Own (Potentially Conflicting) Paths
- 3 Meet Donald Trump’s Surprising Supporters
- 4 Marco Rubio Won’t Run for Senate in 2016 if He Runs for President
- 5 Smart Ideas: The Administration’s Contradictions on Bathroom Access; Poverty Changes One’s DNA
What We're Following See More »
The House voted down the otherwise uncontroversial Energy and Water appropriations bill Thursday after Democrats succeeded in attaching an amendment affirming LGBT job discrimination protections for military contractors. More than 40 Republicans supported the amendment, but when it came to vote on the bill, 130 Republicans joined all but six Democrats to sink the bill. Speaker Paul Ryan said Democrats voting against the bill after securing the amendment shows their intention was to scuttle the process. Democrats, however, blamed other so-called poison-pill amendments for their votes against the bill. Nonetheless, Ryan said he intends to continue the appropriations process.
"It's about time for unity," said UAW President Dennis Williams. "We're endorsing Hillary Clinton. She's gotten 3 million more votes than Bernie, a million more votes than Donald Trump. She's our nominee." He called Sanders "a great friend of the UAW" while saying Trump "does not support the economic security of UAW families." Some 28 percent of UAW members indicated their support for Trump in an internal survey.
"Donald Trump on Thursday reached the number of delegates needed to clinch the Republican nomination for president, completing an unlikely rise that has upended the political landscape and sets the stage for a bitter fall campaign. Trump was put over the top in the Associated Press delegate count by a small number of the party's unbound delegates who told the AP they would support him at the convention."