[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 162 (Thursday, December 9, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8689-S8690]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
START TREATY
Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I think most of us believe we should not
play partisan politics when it comes to nuclear weapons. But in a
speech this morning at the Heritage Foundation, my colleagues, our
colleague, Senator Jim DeMint, claimed the new START treaty weakens our
national security. I like our colleague from South Carolina. He has
been the ranking member on the European Affairs Subcommittee of the
Foreign Relations Committee, which I have chaired for the last 2 years,
and we have worked very well together. But on this issue he is just
wrong.
Nearly the entire foreign policy and national security establishment,
Democrats and Republicans alike, completely disagree with him. Senator
DeMint is arguing that this treaty somehow weakens our national
security and limits our strategic options. That argument has little
basis in reality and is opposed by every living former Republican
Secretary of State, five former Secretaries of Defense, seven former
commanders of our strategic nuclear weapons, foreign policy and
national security giants from seven former Presidential administrations
and former President George H.W. Bush. All of these national security
heavyweights argue the exact opposite of Senator DeMint, and they all
agree the new START treaty strengthens our national security.
The new START treaty has the unanimous backing of America's military
leadership and America's NATO allies. According to the most recent CBS
news poll, the treaty now has the support of 82 percent of Americans.
Now is the time to vote on the new START treaty. No one is rushing this
treaty. Since the treaty was signed back in April, the Senate has had
245 days--I want to repeat that, 245 days--to thoroughly review and
consider this agreement. After 20 Senate hearings, more than 31
witnesses, over 900 questions and answers, and 8 months of
consideration, including a significant delay during the August recess
for additional time before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the
consensus is clear. New START is in our national security interest, and
the Senate should not wait any longer to ratify this treaty.
I ask the opponents of this treaty to consider our broader national
security interests. Think about the effect stalling this treaty or
publicly rejecting it will have not only on our ability to monitor
Russia--because we have had no inspectors on the ground in Russia for
over a year now because the treaty expired on December 5, so it has
been over a year--but on all of our counterproliferation efforts around
the world. Failing to ratify New START this year tells the world we are
not serious about the nuclear threat.
I know my colleagues don't want Iran or North Korea or al-Qaida to
have the bomb. We have heard that from everyone in this Chamber.
Everyone is clear about that. Last week five former Republican
Secretaries of State from five former Republican Presidents connected
the passage of New START to our efforts on Iran and North Korea.
Again, I ask opponents of this treaty, are ideological goals worth
the risk to our national security? Delaying a vote on New START into
next year is a dangerous and unnecessary gamble with this Nation's
security. I hope the opponents of this treaty will reconsider their
opposition and recognize how important it is to this country's security
to pass this treaty this year in this Congress.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
[[Page S8690]]
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________