SENATOR XXXXXXXX. Thank you, Mr. Xxxxxxxx, this is obviously a very important hearing, so thank you for holding it. And Secretary Xxxxx, I also appreciate your willingness to come back to the Senate, after seeing you yesterday on Russia and Geor- gia. Good to see you, Secretary Xxxx and Xx. Xxxxxxxxx. When we debated the United States-India Civil Nuclear Coopera- tion Agreement 2 years ago, I noted my concerns that it would dra- matically shift 30 years of nonproliferation policy. Without ques- tion, our relationship with India is one of the most important in the region, and in the world, and is absolutely critical to building a secure, stable, and prosperous global system. But, I still am concerned that this agreement does not have xxx- xxxxx protections to guard against the spread of nuclear weapons, and nuclear technology. After reviewing this unprecedented deal—including, once again, the supporting classified documents, which I recommend all of my colleagues take a look at, and after discussing this agreement with senior Indian Government officials on a recent trip to India—I am still concerned that this deal seriously undermines nonproliferation efforts, and could contribute to an arms race that would have glob- al implications. I think we could have crafted a deal that would have benefited our national interests, as well as India’s, but if Congress approves this deal in its current form, I believe we will not have done that. In late August, the members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group at- tempted—attempted—to reduce the negative impact of this agree- ment on their ability to prevent the spread of sensitive nuclear ma- xxxxxxx, but the administration succeeded in overcoming those ef- forts. Congress now has a choice—approve this deal in its current, flawed form, or require the administration to seek nonproliferation measures to try to ensure we don’t undermine the coalitions that we all know we’ve meticulously put together over the last 30 years. The proliferation of nuclear technology, know-how and material is one of the top national security threats we face. While India may share a desire to control the spread of nuclear weapons, by under- mining international standards this agreement may actually con- tribute to that threat. Now, I remain concerned that this agreement could indirectly benefit India’s nuclear weapons program, and potentially con- tribute to an arms race in the region. Isn’t it true that, by opening the door to providing nuclear supplies to India, we ar...
SENATOR XXXXXXXX. But the final declaration has not been sub- mitted, is that right? Xx. XXXX. The separation plan, because it was concluded in 2006, will need some updating, but the list of facilities, as Xx. Xxxxxxxxx mentioned earlier, that will be subjected to safeguards, and the phasing remain operative. Senator XXXXXXXX. Is it your intent to authorize licenses pursu- ant to the United States-India Cooperation Agreement before India files the legally required declaration? Xx. XXXX. IAEA safeguards would need to be in place at a facil- ity before we would allow for the export of material from the United States to that facility. Therefore, for IAEA safeguards to be enforced, the agreement that you reference would need to take ef- fect. Senator XXXXXXXX. So you would not authorize licenses prior to that? Xx. XXXX. Because there would need to be IAEA safeguards in effect. Senator XXXXXXXX. Secretary Xxxx, does India have a legally binding commitment to include all of the facilities it announced as civilian in 2006 in the declaration? Xx. XXXX. Your question was, does India require—— Senator XXXXXXXX. Does India have a legally binding commit- ment to include all of the facilities it announced as civilian in March 2006 in the declaration we just discussed? Xx. XXXX. Do you want to take that? Xx. XXXXXXXXX. Senator, the answer to that would be no. The declaration will be made after the safeguards agreement comes into force, our understanding is, is that the declaration will be the same facilities, in the same timeframe, as was included in the separation plan. But, that’s not a legally binding commitment, and when the safeguards agreement enters into force, ultimately, it will be up to India, what it submits to safeguards, and when. Senator XXXXXXXX. And is there a document that you can provide to the committee with—in this regard, at this time?
SENATOR XXXXXXXX. All right. The provision of enrichment or reprocessing technologies by any member of the Nuclear Supplier Group could also directly benefit India’s nuclear program, as safeguards do not prevent the transfer of people and knowledge.
SENATOR XXXXXXXX the funds for the Municipal Equalization Fund, once again, is coming from where? SENATOR XXXXXXXXXX: It comes from two sources. One is that administrative fee that the city...or that the state is giving now to the cities that they have been using for city sales tax collection. The other is the insurance premium tax fund.
SENATOR XXXXXXXX. Okay. So, the administration fee is now being reimbursed from the state to local government? SENATOR XXXXXXXXXX: No. We bring that in. That gets put into the fund.
SENATOR XXXXXXXX. They don't work full days, that's one ofthe reasons I'm against saying let them retire at 60 because they're burned out. They don't do enough to be burned out. This i3 one of those deals which is feathering certain nests, and I am opposed to it. I'll have to put my light on again. SPEAKER KRISTENSEN: Senator Xxxxxxxx. Senator Xxxxxxx. SENATOR ‘XXXXXXX: Senior Kristensen, members of the Legislature, I hope you'll follow me for a minute, because I want to demonstrate to you what total disrespect some ofthe district court judges have for this body, total disrespectfor
SENATOR XXXXXXXX. Mr . President and members of the body, that was a fine speech you made, Senator XxXxxx, but I would like to ask you a question, how are you going to enforce it? SENATOR XXXXXX: Senator Xxxxxxxx, the same way the personal property tax laws are now enforced in the State of Nebraska. Number one, the integrity and honesty of the individual, but, number two, the risk in lying and potential audit if they do lie. I assume there is going to be some fudging just l i k e th e re is so me fudging now.
SENATOR XXXXXXXX. Thank you. In other words, what you and Senator Xxxxxx are saying is that there are some people out there that are dishonest and the crooks do not follow the law. That is what is being said here or we wouldn't need this amendment. So, therefore, I say let's do not adopt the amendment. PRESIDENT: Senator Xxxxxx, do you wish to close? SENATOR XXXXXX: T h ank you. M r . President and members, I want to thank Senator XxXxxx, Senator Xxxxxxx, Senator Xxxxxx and several others of you fo r s upporting this amendment. I th i nk that there i s a n answer for every question and it is clear that there are still some questions but the policy of trying to tie the actual exemptions to the actual use of the earthmoving equipment is a very reasonable thing to do. And I tried to bring this amendment up on General File. It was over the noon hour. If you remember, I said, look, I know everybody's tired, they want to go eat, so I will bring it up on Select File. So I tried to bring
SENATOR XXXXXXXX commercial property, farm implements, fast food franchises, or any other area of commercial activity, do we? SPEAKER KRISTENSEN: Unless you have a contract, and that's where I guess...
SENATOR XXXXXXXX. Right, the contract governs it, but where we put into the law that this must be sold for a reasonable price. SPEAKER KRISTENSEN: Oh, I would agree, I would agree, right. I don't think we've done that other... SENATOR XXXXXXXX: Are you comfortable putting that in the law? SPEAKER XXXXXXXXXX: Comfortable, comfortable is...
