Skip to Navigation
Skip to Content

Support PSR!

Make a difference in the challenge to confront global warming and prevent nuclear war and the development and use of nuclear weapons.

Donate Now »

Take Action

Please voice your support for a strong, health-protective rule by submitting your comment to the EPA today.

PSR opposes expansion of Medium Extended Air Defense System

March 18, 2013

Dear Senator:

As the Continuing Resolution winds its way through the House and Senate, it has come to our attention that the House of Representatives added $380 million for the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS).  

According to a March 14, 2013 op-ed in The Hill by retired United States Air Force Colonel Ron Wassom, “MEADS, the multi-national medium-range missile defense program among the U.S., Italy, and Germany, has routinely been over budget and behind schedule during its 18-year history. Some estimates put the cost overruns in excess of $2 billion. Not surprisingly, in 2011 the Pentagon cancelled the planned procurement of MEADS, stating that it could not afford it in this cost-conscious budget environment.”

Proponents of MEADS claim that the U.S. withdrawal requires spending $380 million in termination costs.  The truth is that the U.S. can and should terminate this program without incurring this cost.  Senator Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) will be proposing an amendment to eliminate this funding and we are asking you to support this amendment.  You may be aware that Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) has called MEADS a “waste of money.”

There are times when partisan politics divide us – this is not one of those times.  Please support the Ayotte amendment to eliminate MEADS funding and please support the final termination of this program.

Browse Resources

Action Alerts

More action alerts»

Resources

  • Annual Report 2012

    PSR is pleased to present its 2012 Annual Report to our members and other stakeholders. Read more »

  • Chemical Reform and CICA

    The health of all Americans is the primary objective of chemical policy reform. That reform effort is now underway – and it has serious implications for doctors, nurses, and other health care providers. Read more »

  • States' Rights and Federal Chemical Policy Reform

    The issue of protecting states' rights from interference by the federal government is often a conservative, pro-business position. Except when it comes to managing chemicals in consumer products -- then industry is in favor of federal regulation or at least a national system which would supersede state’s rights. Read more »

In the Spotlight

  • July 17, 2014
    Our Best Opportunity to Cut Climate Change
    We need you to take action now! Tell the EPA that its proposed rule to cut carbon pollution from power plants Is vitally important and on the right track – but can be strengthened.