Senate Proceeding on Oct 1st, 2008 :: 1:19:20 to 1:40:57
Total video length: 1 hours 47 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Views:356 Duration: 0:21:37 Discussion

Previous speech:

1:19:07 to 1:19:20( Edit History Discussion )

the problem with having a proliferation of nuclear devices around is a concern to all of us and, obviously, each and every one of us bear responsibility to do everything we can to minimize the threat

1:19:20 to 1:19:33( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: such weapons pose. i don't know of anyone more vigilant in that effort than my colleague from indiana along with our former colleague, senator nunn, the proposals which were not pursued as aggressively

1:19:20 to 1:40:57( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Christopher Dodd

1:19:33 to 1:19:45( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: as they should have been by this administration to convince the former soviet union and other nations to dismantle weapons of mass destruction, particularly nuclear weapons. that program exists and

1:19:45 to 1:19:58( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: there are those would would like to do everything we could to see it pursued more aggressively and there are countless examples over the years of members who sought similar means by which we could

1:19:58 to 1:20:11( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: reduce the threat. i would argue, and i will, that this very bill is in that-very much is if that tradition. it is not a deviation from the effort. it is in that same tradition others have pursued.

1:20:11 to 1:20:21( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: how do we create and formulate the means by which we can reduce those threats? let me point out to my colleagues, this bill is comprehensive in many ways. certainly not perfect by anyone's stretch. contrary

1:20:21 to 1:20:34( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: to the suggestion there has been one hearing on this, as if somehow this were thrown together in the last couple of weeks there have been five major hearings with multiple panels on this conducted

1:20:34 to 1:20:46( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: by senator biden and senator lugar and the other body conducted that many hearings, and it began four years ago, this process. not something just a week or two ago. you heard senator lugar say he

1:20:46 to 1:20:58( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: alone submitted 174 questions to the state department and other agencies demanding their response and publicly sighed them on his website so the questions many of us have, have been addressed. maybe

1:20:58 to 1:21:12( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: not to the satisfaction of much but pursuing the very issues. the reason i mention that is if, in fact, this amendment were adopted and of course there is no means by which to resolve the matters

1:21:12 to 1:21:23( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: with the other body that already adopted a bill without this language in it, and, therefore, this would pass without consideration, come next year the administration -- because the time runs out -- will

1:21:23 to 1:21:38( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: be submitting the agreement without the amendments included, many of which do exactly what my colleague from new mexico and north dakota are seeking to achieve. so the irony of ironies would be

1:21:38 to 1:21:50( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: while i respect immensely their intent and the -- what they seek. in fact, it would be counterproductive to the goal they are trying to achieve. that is, to strip away everything we have achieved under

1:21:50 to 1:22:02( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: senator biden's leadership and senator lugar and howard berman in the other body to include the requirements this bill mandates. is this a perfect bill, mr. president? absolutely not. but if we allow

1:22:02 to 1:22:18( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: the perfect to become the enemy of the good we will find ourselves, i think, in a far more serious situation than the one senator dorgan and senator bingaman described to you. i would never make the argument

1:22:18 to 1:22:29( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: to my colleagues that if you adopt this amendment -- i always always -- i don't say "hate" -- my wife reminds me not to use the word "hate" in front of the children. i deplore arguments that this is

1:22:29 to 1:22:40( Edit History Discussion )

a killer amendment and we have to do further work. that is insulting. in fact, an amendment is good, it ought to be adopted and we ought not shy appear from our responsibility. but as a matter of fact,

1:22:40 to 1:22:51( Edit History Discussion )

i will argue the amendment is unnecessary. existing law does exactly what my colleagues are asking us to do today but if we adopt them here we run the risk of ending up interest something coming back

1:22:51 to 1:23:05( Edit History Discussion )

a lot worse than what senator biden, senator lugar and the foreign affairs committee, and the other body's work have accomplished and achieved. and that, as i hope my colleagues listen to this debate,

1:23:05 to 1:23:17( Edit History Discussion )

will take under consideration. as i point out the agreement would be resubmitted in january. the president -- the next president would not have to seek special law which is what we have here, to speed

1:23:17 to 1:23:30( Edit History Discussion )

up the process. rather, he could wait us out physical the atomming energy forces -- the atomic energy act forces us to take a vote. a clean resolution of approval or disapproval without the amendments

1:23:30 to 1:23:43( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: we have adopted and worked on over the years. let me an argument that senator lugar raised and i didn't and i regret not mentioning it because it is compelling argument. one of the arguments that

1:23:43 to 1:23:59( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: people need to understand is that india doesn't have an unl supply of material -- unlimited supply of material to create nuclear materials. they will be fed without outside sources of supply to make a choice

1:23:59 to 1:24:14( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: between weapons, nuclear weapons or the commercial power plants. that choice. now, i don't speak as a great expert on india politics or the public mood in india. but nations,articularly ones in the

1:24:14 to 1:24:26( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: neighborhood, what choice would they make if they could only make one? is it going to be energy? or security? that's a difficult choice. while all of us want to see the energy choices made, are nations

1:24:26 to 1:24:38( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: surrounded by nations who have nuclear capabilities? not exactly remotely close to the democracy that india; by the way. may very well decide to have different alternatives. if you are sitting in

1:24:38 to 1:24:50( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: the india parliament and are member of their conference and you have one choice to make: security or energy. security or energy. how would we vote? how would we vote here if confronted by that

1:24:50 to 1:25:04( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: choice? that's the choice that india may have well be confronted without additional sources of energy heresince there are no supplies to promote the commercial use of this power. i don't want to necessarily

1:25:04 to 1:25:18( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: put india in that position to make that choice. because i think i know what choice they would make. i suspect it is the same choice we would make. we have an obligation to keep the people here. i

1:25:18 to 1:25:30( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: suspect the indian parliament feels likewise and confronted with that, we know what they would choose -- security. the very thing my colleagues have argued against, in fact, we would be driving

1:25:30 to 1:25:48( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: them to that conclusion. so obviously, the energy debate is critical. no one has been more of an advocate of green teblgs than our colleague from new mexico, one of the stalwarts in this debate for many years,

1:25:48 to 1:26:04( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: not just recently where it become popular to argue for alternative energy resources. if we take away this alternative, india is growing, 1.3 billion people. it has 300 million living at middle-class or

1:26:04 to 1:26:15( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: what we cal middle-class standards. they have a billion living in ject poverty in india and are seeking ways to, of course, bring many of those people out of poverty and improve the quality of their

1:26:15 to 1:26:28( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: lives. they understand coal-powered plants are are a liability but they cannot slow the growth of energy production and at the same time the population is growing and dealing with economic circumstances

1:26:28 to 1:26:41( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: of its people. so india says, we would like to build more commercial power plants, it seems to me for those who want to reduce the carbon footprint, the carbon emitters, and india being a major supplier

1:26:41 to 1:26:51( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: of carbon emissions it is in our interest to encourage them to move in a different energy direction. again, if we don't have some sort of arrangement, understanding, how we achieve that while simultaneously

1:26:51 to 1:27:04( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: moving them away from that choice i mentioned a moment ago we end up potential where they have more weapons and doing little or nothing about energy production, it is a lose-lose proposition. we end up

1:27:04 to 1:27:18( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: with india with nuclear weapons and we end up with a nation that uses coal-fired plantsen dangering us further when it comes to the issue of global warming. a further reason, i would argue, that we

1:27:18 to 1:27:33( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: ought to seriously understand the import of these amendments and appreciate the alternative presented by the bill before us. now i mentioned earlier that, in fact, the very concerns my two colleagues

1:27:33 to 1:27:47( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: raised are covered by existing law. it is not as if there is some vacuum here that exists, that there would be no repercussion should india pursue and test nuclear weapons. let me share with my colleagues

1:27:47 to 1:28:01( Edit History Discussion )

and i invite members of the staff who spent literally their adult lives, professional careers, working on these very issues, to suggest this was thrown together in a quick hearing before the senate foreign

1:28:01 to 1:28:12( Edit History Discussion )

affairs committee is, in a sense, failing to appreciate and understand the work done by our collective staffs on these matters going back years. in fact, previous members of this body -- no one cared more

1:28:12 to 1:28:31( Edit History Discussion )

about this than john glenn of ohio. he was an advocate of this issue long before many were. i will share with you some of the law that bears his name and is still the law of the land when it comes to

1:28:31 to 1:28:46( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: these issues, the glen amendment and issues of people, countries that would go into the use of nuclear weapons. this amendment bars any and all nuclear exports for all time. section 106 sets a different

1:28:46 to 1:29:01( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: standard for india than for any other nonnuclear weapon state which is what india -- what is under the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and u.s. law. there is no need, i think it would be very harmful

1:29:01 to 1:29:15( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: to single india out. other nations are in a similar situation. i don't hear amendments being offered to suggest they all ought to be created in the same way. we are picking out one great democracy

1:29:15 to 1:29:28( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: in south asia with whom we have had a testy relationship in 25 years, critical in dealing with problems in that area, and we are going to say them and no one also gets this treaty. you can imagine the

1:29:28 to 1:29:41( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: reaction from a nation working out now to us for the first time in half an century to get us back on a different one. india would see this as an effort to put in place special penalties against

1:29:41 to 1:29:57( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: that nation if it were to respond. so, frankly, the proposed new section is, as i said, a section i think poses very serious, serious issues. i commented before and put the language in, and i think

1:29:57 to 1:30:18( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: everyone mentioned earlier and i will quote from the secretary of state, she said we have been very clear with the indians. should india test as it agreed not to do so? or should india violate the

1:30:18 to 1:30:36( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: ieae agreements -- and at that point a deal would be off. what is more, the amendment is unnecessary. several provisions of existing law already apply to india. the glenn amendment, sections under

1:30:36 to 1:30:49( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: export control act cut off foreign aid, defense exports, bank credit, all under the glenn amendment and there is no waiver of the amendment. this was notified some years later but there is no waiver. the glenn

1:30:49 to 1:31:10( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: amendment is tougher, in many ways, and does not provide any kind of relief. congress enacted, i might point out here, in 1999, some what of a waiver after india and pakistan tested in the 1990's but

1:31:10 to 1:31:23( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: that waiver authority terminates for either country that tests again. so it is the modified glenn amendment. the glenn amendment is clear. section 129, the atomic energy act prohibits exports to a nonnuclear

1:31:23 to 1:31:40( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: weapon state if it detonates a nuclear device. that is subject to waiver by the president. india is a nonproliferation weapons state by definition and is included under this. that law is in the books

1:31:40 to 1:31:51( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: similar to what is advocated hear. the president can only use the waiver of section 129 if he finds that ceasing export would be seriously prejudicial to the achievement of united states nonproliferation

1:31:51 to 1:32:11( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: objectives or other cause a problem for the country. that is high standard for waiver authority. even if the president makes that determination, cooperation cannot proceed until 60 days of continuous

1:32:11 to 1:32:22( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: session have passed and after that determination has been submitted to congress. further, making that provision almost impossible to apply that waiver standard. so there are two sections that virtually

1:32:22 to 1:32:46( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: does what their amendment does. it would amend the act to ensure that the senate can take advantage of expedited procedures, limits on debate, and amendment, to pass a joint resolution to overturn

1:32:46 to 1:33:02( Edit History Discussion )

such a presidential waiver even if you got to that point. we've now put a further safeguard against it making it helpful and we are using language, here, but this applies to states that we all

1:33:02 to 1:33:13( Edit History Discussion )

-- be honest, we all know -- have nuclear weapons. there are several nations we know about in that category but they are called nonnuclear weapon states and yet here the large is very, very strong. and again

1:33:13 to 1:33:26( Edit History Discussion )

i think these sections are important to note. and the combination of the two amendments really do cover the ground on all of this. i would point out that under senator bingaman's part of this amendment,

1:33:26 to 1:33:39( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: this new section 107 is not necessary either. u.s. obligations your honor the nuclear nonproliferation treaty already compel the united states to ensure that their exports do not help nonnuclear weapon

1:33:39 to 1:33:51( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: states to produce weapons and that bars helping not only india but any nonnuclear weapon state. the hyde amendment already provides tools to address the concern that senator bingaman has raised. let's

1:33:51 to 1:33:59( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: look at the specific provision, if you have, under the proposed section 107. if t. would require certification by a certain nuclear detonation by india that no technology contributed to the detonation

1:33:59 to 1:34:10( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: and what happens if the president makes that certification? the amendment doesn't say what happens. what happens if the president does not make the certification or says he does not know whether

1:34:10 to 1:34:25( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: or not any u.s. material, equipment, or technology was involved? this is a certification that may well be impossible to make under the law as drafted in this amendment. so even the intent to do something

1:34:25 to 1:34:38( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: about it, how can you make it? how are you going to determine whether or not in fact materials have been useed? or is it assumption that if one occurred it may be t may be an entirely false assumption.

1:34:38 to 1:34:53( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: how will we ever know for sure that no u.s. technology was diverted? in any case, it is the certification that carries no consequences and a certification is not needed. section 104 of the hyde act already

1:34:53 to 1:35:04( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: requires the president to keep congress fully and currently informed of any violation by india of its nonproliferation commitments and of this agreement. any contribution by u.s. exports to india's peps

1:35:04 to 1:35:18( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: program, the agreement would certainly be a violation of india's commitments and of the agreement. and so would need to be reported to us. and would very likely be reported to us long before any detonation,

1:35:18 to 1:35:29( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: i might add. section 2 of the proposed act requires a report from the president after an i understand ian test describing those united states export controls that could be used to minimize any potential

1:35:29 to 1:35:39( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: contribution. u.s. nuclear exports to third countries might make to an india nuclear weapons program. the hietd h. hyde act and the atomic energy act already addresses this issue, mr. president. i

1:35:39 to 1:35:53( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: would quote to my colleagues again. i apologize for citing in detail these things but you need to know this because statements are being made on the floor about this that i say respectfully are not accurate

1:35:53 to 1:36:08( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: about what existing law requires and mandates and demands in these areas. section 104-d-5. hyde act requires the president of the united states -- quote -- "shall ensure that all appropriate measures are

1:36:08 to 1:36:20( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: taken to maintain accountability with respect to nuclear materials, equipment, and technology rerted to india." end of quote -- to ensure the united states compliance with other articles of the nonproliferation

1:36:20 to 1:36:33( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: treaty. section 104-d-2 of the hyde act splice explicitly requires detailed reporting on any united states authorizations for the re-export to india of nuclear materials and equipment. the atomic energy act

1:36:33 to 1:36:46( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: further requires that the united states not engage in civil nuclear cooperation with any country without an agreement of nuclear cooperation and that every such agreement must contain a guarantee by the other

1:36:46 to 1:36:53( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: country that it will not transfer any nuclear material or facility to a third country without the prior approval of the united states. section 127 of that act makes it explicit that for any u.s. export

1:36:53 to 1:37:06( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: of source or special nuclear material, nuclear facilities 0 or sensitiveteletext nuclear technology, that material, facility, or technology may not

1:37:06 to 1:37:21( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: be retransferred to a third party without the united states's prior consent. the transfer cannot go forward unless a third party agrees to abide by all of the agreements of section 127. that section,

1:37:21 to 1:37:35( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: mr. president, also requires that the source a and special nuclear material, nuclear facilities and sensitive nuclear technology being exported must be under iaea safeguards and may not be useed for

1:37:35 to 1:37:48( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: research and development son an explosive nuclear device t ensures us that any such report does not contribute to india's weapons program. if india were to conduct another nuclear test or rere-export by

1:37:48 to 1:38:01( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: third countries equipment or technology, would be the least likely way for india to evade a cutoff of u.s. cooperation f any third country were to provide u.s. origin nuclear material or equipment

1:38:01 to 1:38:11( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: or material device in the united states, origin or equipment to india without u.s. consent, the united states would have the right -- would have the righ -- to cease nuclear cooperation with that

1:38:11 to 1:38:26( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: country and to demand the return of materials and/or equipment that has been provided under that country's nuclear cooperation agreement with the united states. so, mr. president, third countries are highly

1:38:26 to 1:38:38( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: unlikely, given the implications under the existing law, to re-export without our permission or run the risk obviously of facing all of the admonitions that the existing law requires. much more serious

1:38:38 to 1:38:49( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: concern would be the risk that other countries would export their own nuclear material or equipment, into the our material but their own nuclear material, equipment, or technology after we had cut

1:38:49 to 1:39:00( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: off exports. and that concern is not addressed at all by the dorgan and bingaman amendment at all. but the bill before us does address that concern, which their amendment leaves out entirely which is

1:39:00 to 1:39:11( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: a far more dangerous way this may happen. so under the bill before us, by reiterating a provision under the hyde act that if india should test again quote -- quote -- "it is the policy of the united

1:39:11 to 1:39:24( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: states to seek to prevent the transfer to india of nuclear equipment, of materials, or technology fm other participating governments in the nuclear suppliers group or from any other source." mr. president,

1:39:24 to 1:39:37( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: this bill already lays down a marker regarding the real concern if india were to test and again whether it's re-export, direct shipments, we are in a position, i think, to respond aggressively. i'd point

1:39:37 to 1:39:50( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: out, you defeat this bill, we're back to the agreement and a lot of this stuff in existing law is not -- does not apply. so again, i say to my friends and colleagues who offered the amendment, this

1:39:50 to 1:40:03( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: is not a debate about whether or not some people care about nuclear weapons and others don't. the question is, are we being smart and intelligent about moving a major democracy that flifs a dangerous

1:40:03 to 1:40:13( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: part of the world into a direction that will make it more cooperative with us in exactly doing what the underlying amendment seeks to do? that is to move are awray from weapons for commercial use, to

1:40:13 to 1:40:22( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: dealing with the carbon emugses that are occurring here, to provide that new relationship with india that i think is critical for our safety and security in the 21st century? walk away from this, drive

1:40:22 to 1:40:33( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: further a wedge between india and the united states in that part of the world, then i think you're going to have exactly the kind of problem that our two colleagues have suggested. it gets closer

1:40:33 to 1:40:45( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: to what they fear most. i believe what we've offered our colleagues today drives us further away from that outcome, which is what all of us ought to be trying to achieve. and they's the reason i reject

1:40:45 to 1:40:57( Edit History Discussion )

Christopher Dodd: these -- and that's the reason i reject these amendments and urge my colleagues to do so later today. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. lugar: mr. president? the presiding officer:

1:40:57 to 1:41:13( Edit History Discussion )

Richard Lugar: the senator from indiana. mr. lugar: mr. president, i join my distinguished colleague, senator dodd, in rising in opposition to the amendment offered by the senators from north dakota and new mexico. i believe