Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Congressional Caucuses and Arms Control

by Travis Sharp [contact information]

Published on the Nukes of Hazard Blog on November 4, 2009

In their classic Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy, Priscilla Clapp and Morton Halperin describe Congress as “hydra-headed” because of the way it influences foreign policy both formally, such as through legislation, and informally, such as through pressure from individual members.

Caucuses are the perfect example of an informal method. According to Congressional Quarterly, there are 265 caucuses and working groups in Congress today. They run the gamut from the powerful Blue Dog Coalition to the more epicurean Congressional Wine Caucus. There are also a number of caucuses that focus on nuclear weapons, arms control, and proliferation.

To illuminate the executive-legislative interaction that is already occurring and will intensify as the Obama administration moves to complete bilateral U.S.-Russian reductions of nuclear warheads and delivery vehicles, it helps to identify these conduits of informal power on Capitol Hill.

First, there are the caucuses that work on nuclear weapons issues because their members’ constituents have a stake in the outcome. These lawmakers are typically more determined to influence administration policy because failing to do so might incur political costs, up to and including electoral losses.

Senate ICBM Coalition
Chaired by: Sens. Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota) and Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming)
Recent activity: Sent letters to the White House and Secretary Robert Gates about the importance of the ICBM force; introduced an amendment, which ultimately wasn’t included in the FY 2010 Defense Authorization bill, stating that as the United States and Russia negotiate nuclear reductions, “the United States must be certain that the long-term vitality of the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems is not threatened.”

Congressional Submarine Caucus
Chaired by: Reps. Jim Langevin (D-Rhode Island) and J. Randy Forbes (R-Virginia)
Recent activity: Met earlier this year with the Submarine Industrial Base Council, which was lobbying lawmakers to support funding for the next generation ballistic missile submarine.

Long Range Strike Caucus
Chaired by: Del. Madeleine Bordallo (D-Guam) and Rep. John Fleming (R-Louisiana)
Recent activity: Just officially formed on October 29, but plans to advocate for the next generation strategic bomber as well as cruise missiles, ICBMs, and nuclear weapons technology and facilities.

Missile Defense Caucus
Chaired by: Reps. Trent Franks (R-Arizona), Doug Lamborn (R-Colorado), and Pete Sessions (R-Texas)
Recent activity: Angrily condemned the Obama administration’s revised plan for U.S. missile defense in Europe.

In addition, there are a handful of arms control caucuses that exist for less obviously parochial purposes. These include the Senate Caucus on WMD Terrorism, Non-Proliferation Task Force, and Congressional Nuclear Security Caucus.

Of course, each party’s leadership also organizes briefings and studies when nuclear weapons policy becomes part of the congressional agenda. Recent examples include both a Senate Republican Policy Committee report and a memo from Republican Whip Sen. Jon Kyl.

While caucus memberships are not the only or even the most effective way a member can influence policy, they do publicly communicate a lawmaker’s principles and priorities. As START follow-on negotiations progress, these aforementioned caucuses are likely to become even more prominent as lawmakers seek to advance their ideological and political interests.