PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 23, 2009
Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Improvement Act of 2009 - Prohibits more than 10% of amounts appropriated or otherwise made available in any fiscal year for Department of Defense (DOD) Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs from being expended to promote bilateral and multilateral activities relating to nonproliferation and disarmament. Requires the Secretary of Defense to notify the congressional defense, appropriations, and foreign relations committees at least 15 days before expending funds under such authority.
Expresses the sense of the Senate that: (1) continued expansion of CTR programs requires increased cooperation with all unified combatant commands in which such activities are carried out; and (2) DOD should undertake a review of CTR contracting procedures, umbrella agreements, and program metrics to ensure that they are being undertaken consistently with CTR program urgency and necessity.
Establishes in the Treasury the Cooperative Threat Reduction Partnership Account, to be used for CTR programs without further specific authorization in law.
People & committees
Sen. Lugar, Richard G. [R-IN] · R–IN
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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4673-4674)
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 14, 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.873 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.873 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.873 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.873 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.