Sponsors (10)
The resolution stresses that pursuing verifiable arms control and documenting nuclear risks can reduce existential and humanitarian dangers and strengthen norms, but it also highlights trade‑offs including higher modernization costs, potential constraints on military options, and risks tied to current nuclear postures.
All Americans: pursuing verifiable arms‑control and disarmament could reduce the overall risk of nuclear catastrophe.
Taxpayers and Congress: the resolution highlights high projected nuclear modernization costs, improving awareness of large federal spending pressures and budget trade‑offs.
Local and state governments (and the public): documenting humanitarian and climate impacts of nuclear weapons use supports policies to prevent nuclear use and protect public health and food security.
Taxpayers: maintaining or modernizing nuclear forces will likely increase federal spending and long‑term costs.
Military personnel and the public: U.S. first‑use and launch‑under‑attack postures compress decision time and increase the risk of accidental or hasty nuclear use.
Military personnel: renewed arms‑control commitments could constrain some military planning options and be seen as reducing deterrence flexibility.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Records congressional findings about nuclear risks, arms control, U.S declaratory policy, and the high cost of nuclear force modernization.
Official title: Urging the United States to lead a global effort to halt and reverse the nuclear arms race.
Introduced July 16, 2025 by Edward John Markey · Last progress July 16, 2025
States congressional findings about the global risks from nuclear weapons, noting that roughly 12,000 nuclear warheads remain worldwide, that the United States and Russia hold the vast majority, and that even limited nuclear use could cause catastrophic climate disruption and famine. It highlights near‑misses, current geopolitical tensions that raise risk, the U.S. declaratory policy permitting first use and a launch‑under‑attack posture, and large projected costs to modernize the U.S. nuclear force. The resolution also recalls past arms‑control gains, references the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and warns that treaty withdrawals and the possible lapse of New START could permit increases in deployed warheads. It is a findings statement rather than a funding or operational directive.