A group of House Democrats and a Senate Democrat introduced a bill Tuesday that would ban the Trump administration’s plans for a so-called low-yield nuclear weapon.

“We should not fund President Trump Donald John TrumpBiden on Trump's refusal to commit to peaceful transfer of power: 'What country are we in?' Romney: 'Unthinkable and unacceptable' to not commit to peaceful transition of power Two Louisville police officers shot amid Breonna Taylor grand jury protests MORE’s request for new low-yield nuclear weapons,” House Armed Services Committee ranking member Adam Smith David (Adam) Adam SmithWhen 'Buy American' and common sense collide Overnight Defense: Marine Corps brushes off criticism of Marines' appearance in GOP convention video | US troops injured in collision with Russian vehicle in Syria | Dems ask for probe of Vindman retaliation allegations Democrats press Pentagon watchdog to probe allegations of retaliation against Vindman brothers MORE (D-Wash.) said in a statement. “His proposal dangerously lowers the threshold to nuclear use and siphons money away from genuine military readiness needs.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Smith introduced the bill in the House alongside Democratic Reps. Ted Lieu (Calif.), John Garamendi John Raymond GaramendiWuhan is the final straw: The world needs to divest from China GOP seizes on 'defund the police' to galvanize base Peace Corps faces uncertain future with no volunteers in field MORE (Calif.) and Earl Blumenauer Earl BlumenauerAhead of a coronavirus vaccine, Mexico's drug pricing to have far-reaching impacts on Americans Trump threatens to double down on Portland in other major cities Federal agents deployed to Portland did not have training in riot control: NYT MORE (Ore.). Democratic Sen. Ed Markey Edward (Ed) John MarkeyDemocrats shoot down talk of expanding Supreme Court Schumer: 'Nothing is off the table' if GOP moves forward with Ginsburg replacement Democrats see fundraising spike following Ginsburg death MORE (Mass.) introduced the Senate version of the bill.

The Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review called for the development of a low-yield nuclear warhead for submarine-launched ballistic missiles. The administration argues it needs such a weapon for deterrence purposes, as adversaries might think the United States would never use its current arsenal.

Opponents of the plan, including Democratic lawmakers and arms control groups, argue it is too costly, could spark a new nuclear arms race and could lead to a greater willingness to use nuclear weapons if officials believe “low-yield” is less destructive.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) signed into law last month authorizes the development of a low-yield warhead. The Energy Department spending bill passed last week would allocate $65 million for the project.

The bill introduced Tuesday would repeal the section of the NDAA authorizing the warhead and instead ban any funding from being used for “the research and development, production or deployment of the Trident D5 low-yield nuclear warhead.”

“There’s no such thing as a low-yield nuclear war,” Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Wash.) said in a statement. “Use of any nuclear weapon, regardless of its killing power, could be catastrophically destabilizing. It opens the door for severe miscalculation and could drag the U.S. and our allies into a devastating nuclear conflict.”

The bill is unlikely to get a vote in a Republican-controlled Congress. Smith, though, has said curbing Trump’s nuclear weapons plans would be one of his priorities if Democrats take back control of the House in the midterm elections and he becomes Armed Services Committee chairman.

“I think the Republican Party and the Nuclear Posture Review contemplates a lot more nuclear weapons than I and I think most Democrats think we need. We also think the idea of low-yield nuclear weapons are extremely problematic going forward,” Smith said at the Defense News conference earlier this month. “When we look at the larger budget picture, that’s not the best place to spend the money.”