It's not too late for New START
Dec 14, 2010
The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty has not yet been ratified by the Senate and even though there are only a few days left in the lame-duck session, we’re still very hopeful it will be get done by the end of the year.
We have just received indications that the Senate will consider New START this week, with debate starting as soon as this evening.
Recently, three Republican Senators released positive statements about New START treaty.
The Perils of Pauline that is New START
Dec 11, 2010
A colleague warned that the fate of New START would be riding a roller coaster in the post-election session, and was she ever correct.
On November 16, the treaty appeared fatally wounded when Key Arizona Senator Jon Kyl ruled out Senate consideration of New START during the lame duck session. His negotiations with the Administration and Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry were still and forever on-going.
That switched in subsequent weeks, when a number of Republican Senators agreed that a deal was close at hand to bring the treaty up before the end of the year.
However, on December 1, all 42 Republican Senators signed a letter saying that no legislation could be considered until the Senate completed action on the tax bill and the appropriations bill. With those two measures still very much in flux and with the Senate slated to adjourn on December 17, that schedule apparently could not accommodate New START.
33 national organizations and individuals urge Senate stay in session until New START approved
Dec 10, 2010
33 national organizations and individuals have written to the top three Democratic leaders -- Senators Harry Reid (D-NV), Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Charles Schumer (D-NY -- urging them to keep the Senate in session until the Senate votes on the New START nuclear reductions treaty.
At present, the Senate is slated to adjourn for the year on December 17, 2010, almost surely not leaving enough time to complete work on the treaty.
The letter noted:
Failure to act on the New START treaty this year would undermine the country’s national security interests, as both our military leadership and numerous former Republican officials have noted.
The letter concluded:
We urge you to take up and approve New START now, if need be by extending the Senate in session beyond December 17.
A complete copy of the letter is below,
Write Your Senators About the New START treaty today!
Dec 07, 2010
Nuclear weapons are a liability, not an asset. They do not protect us from the threat of terrorism, and with some 23,000 nuclear warheads around the globe, there is an enormous risk of nuclear weapons or materials falling into the wrong hands.
The New START nuclear reductions treaty, which is about to be considered by the Senate, is vital for ensuring U.S. national security. The New START treaty makes Americans safer by causing significant cuts in the number of deployed U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons. It also allows the U.S. to inspect the Russian nuclear arsenal and to ensure they are not building up their weapons program. The first START treaty expired in December 2009 and since then the U.S has not been able to inspect the Russian nuclear arsenal.
22 GOP Senators say whoa on New START
Dec 06, 2010
Senators John Ensign (R-NV), Jim DeMint (R-SC) and 20 colleagues sent a letter to Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) on December 2 to say not so fast on New START (8 months is too fast?).
The Senators said: “We have numerous amendments requiring significant debate to the treaty as well as the resolution of ratification that we would like to offer and have votes on. It would be unwise and improper to do this in a hurried fashion over the course of only a few days.”
The letter serves as a signal that these 22 Senators are most likely to vote no when the Senate takes up the treaty. See list below.
Also noteworthy are the dogs that did not bark (fans of Sherlock Holmes?).
Senate end game -- New START & lots more
Dec 06, 2010
Congress is in the end game. Finally.
Majority Leader Harry Reid wants the Senate to go home on December 17.
We do too, so long as the Senate approves New START before going home.
But Reid also laid out an extensive agenda for the next two weeks -- including, of course, the New START nuclear reduction treaty.
On the list for the last two weeks:
New START Treaty
Impeachment trial of Louisiana judge
9/11 heath bill
Firefighters collective bargaining
DREAM immigration bill
$250 cost of living for seniors
New Continuing Resolution or Appropriations Bill
Don't Ask Don't Tell as part of Defense Authorization Bill
Tax cuts
No partridges or pear trees are on the list.
But maybe Secret Santa has some surprises left.
Prospects for New START by end of 2010 improve
Nov 30, 2010
New START just might win approval in the Senate by the end of the year.
Should that happen, mark November 30, 2010 as the key turning point.
But don't count on it just yet.
A number of Republican Senators said good things about New START today, following weeks of criticisms from the same bunch.
Starting from the top: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
Says McConnell: "I think the view - the unanimous view of Senate Republicans is let's take care of the tax issue; let's take care of how we're going to fund the government for the next 10 months; and then if there's time left for other matters, it will be up to the majority leader, Senator Reid, to decide whether we turn to other things before we adjourn for the year."
Call your Senators about New START
Nov 30, 2010
When the START I treaty expired at the end of 2009, the U.S. lost the ability to inspect Russian nuclear arsenals to make sure they are not building new nuclear weapons. It has now been over 355 days since we’ve had inspectors in Russia verifying their arsenal and it is time we get back to Ronald Reagan’s “trust, but verify.”
The New START treaty fixes that problem and makes Americans safer by making significant cuts in the U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals. While the treaty enjoys strong support from foreign policy experts on both the left and the right and multiple polls show the American public overwhelmingly favors the treaty, Republicans in the Senate are fighting against holding a vote on treaty ratification.
It is crucial to put pressure on the Senate to pass New START this year. Below is a list of Republican Senators who will be important in deciding the fate of this treaty. If you live in one of these important states, please take a few minutes to call your Senators and let them know that you support New START and urge them to swiftly approve this treaty! Click here to get your Senator's numbers and a call script you can use to speak with their office!
Bolton and Yoo unbolted and unglued on New START
Nov 12, 2010
By now you all know that arms control bulldozer John Bolton and torture apologist John Yoo penned a mendacious op-ed attacking the New START treaty in Wednesday’s New York Times. Though Bolton and Yoo have less credibility on national security issues than a three dollar bill, it’s still important to set the record straight.
Enter Slate’s Fred Kaplan. As he did with Mitt Romney’s disingenuous diatribe against New START, Kaplan patiently and cogently takes apart Bolton and Yoo’s claims. Here’s how he begins:Last July, when Mitt Romney attacked the New START treaty in a Washington Post op-ed, I wrote that in 35 years of following debates on nuclear arms control I'd never seen anything quite as "thoroughly ignorant" about the subject.
Public -- including GOP -- support New START
Nov 11, 2010
Associated Press story on AP-GfK Poll showing strong and bi-partisan support for New START
Los Angeles Times - ALAN FRAM,Associated Press Writer
November 11, 2010
(excerpt)
“Two-thirds want the Senate to ratify Obama's nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia, including most Democrats, about 6 in 10 Republicans and independents — and even about half of conservative tea party supporters. Some Republican senators oppose the treaty. The Obama administration hopes to win Senate approval in the upcoming lameduck session of Congress and will need GOP support to garner the 67 votes required.”
