PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 11, 2015
Long Range Bomber Sustainment Act of 2015
This bill prohibits a B-1, B-2, or B-52 bomber aircraft from being retired during a fiscal year unless the Secretary of Defense certifies that:
the retirement of the aircraft will not detrimentally affect the U.S. Armed Forces' capacity to carry out the full range of long range bomber aircraft missions anticipated in operational plans of the Armed Forces in effect as of the date of the submission of that certification;
the Secretary has completed assessments of planning scenarios that span the range of plausible future challenges for such aircraft, and the severity, likelihood, and imminence of risk associated with each such planning scenario;
the Secretary has concluded, based on such assessments, that retirements of B-1, B-2, and B-52 bomber aircraft in the near term will not detrimentally affect operational capability; and
the Secretary has developed a plan to replace any operational capability lost as a result of the retirement of such bomber aircraft.
People & committees
Sen. Rounds, Mike [R-SD] · R–SD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.1265 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.1265 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.1265 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.1265 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.