POLISCOPE
Back to feed
FEDERALhearing transcript
High Impact

Congressional Hearing: Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction (FY2023)

Original title: Congressional Hearing CHRG-117hhrg48628

January 1, 2023

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

The Frame

What this does

The hearing establishes the framework for how the U.S. Department of Defense allocates funding and resources to detect, deter, and defend against chemical, biological, and nuclear threats for the 2023 fiscal year.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

Department of Defense

The agency is subject to congressional oversight regarding its WMD strategy and budget requests for the upcoming fiscal year.

U.S. Special Operations Command

The command provides leadership and operational input on countering WMD threats.

What changed

Last recorded activity January 1, 2023.

What's next

Next step not available in the current record.

Summary

This document is a transcript from a House Armed Services Subcommittee hearing held on April 1, 2022. The committee reviewed Department of Defense strategies, policies, and programs for countering weapons of mass destruction () in preparation for the Fiscal Year 2023 budget.

Key Facts

  • The hearing was held on April 1, 2022, by the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Special Operations.
  • The primary focus was the review of Department of Defense strategy and policy regarding weapons of mass destruction (WMD) for the FY2023 budget.
  • The committee discussed the erosion of international norms regarding chemical and biological weapons.
  • The hearing addressed the weaponization of synthetic drugs as an emerging WMD threat.
  • The Department of State's 2021 Compliance Report was cited as evidence that Russia and North Korea maintain offensive biological weapons programs.
  • The subcommittee established rules for remote participation, including requirements for video visibility and microphone management.
  • Witnesses included representatives from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, U.S. Special Operations Command, and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.
  • A post-hearing question was submitted by Representative Austin Scott.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the purpose of this hearing?
The hearing is part of the process for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023, specifically focusing on how the Department of Defense plans to counter weapons of mass destruction.
Who testified at this hearing?
Witnesses included Deborah G. Rosenblum (Assistant Secretary of Defense), John F. Plumb (Assistant Secretary of Defense), Vice Admiral Collin P. Green (U.S. Special Operations Command), and Rhys M. Williams (Defense Threat Reduction Agency).

Why It Matters

The hearing establishes the framework for how the U.S. Department of Defense allocates funding and resources to detect, deter, and defend against chemical, biological, and nuclear threats for the 2023 fiscal year.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Sponsors

Show 1 more sponsor

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift90% confidence

Expansion of WMD Definition

The committee is explicitly expanding its focus on WMDs to include the weaponization of synthetic drugs, moving beyond traditional nuclear/chemical/biological definitions.

Connected Entities

personTrent KellyRanking Member of the SubcommitteeMap →
personRuben GallegoChairman of the Subcommittee on Intelligence and Special OperationsMap →
personDeborah G. RosenblumAssistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Defense ProMap →
personCollin P. GreenVice Admiral, Deputy Commander of U.S. Special Operations CommandMap →
personJohn F. PlumbAssistant Secretary of Defense for Space PolicyMap →
personRhys M. WilliamsActing Director, Defense Threat Reduction AgencyMap →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance75
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy40
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment10
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz20
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record