[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 4]
[House]
[Page 5838]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           A ``NEW START'' TOWARD A NUCLEAR WEAPON-FREE WORLD

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, for those of us who want to live in a world 
without nuclear weapons, there was very little good news, very little 
to celebrate over the last decade or so. The previous administration 
showed barely any interest in eradicating the nuclear threat. But now 
finally, with the recently signed START treaty between the United 
States and Russia, there is cause for optimism and hope for further 
progress.
  In negotiating this agreement, I am pleased that President Obama has 
embraced the principles of the ``no-nukes'' resolution, House 
Resolution 333 that I have introduced in the Congress, and the SMART 
Security approach I've championed for years.
  Much of the attention paid to arms control issues focuses on North 
Korea and the looming possibility of a nuclear threat from Iran. And of 
course these are gravely important matters to grapple with. But the 
fact is that more than 90 percent of the world's nuclear capability 
rests with the two Cold War superpowers. So a serious commitment to 
nonproliferation must begin with a bilateral U.S.-Russia approach.
  This pact, the New START, mandates a 30 percent reduction in the 
allowed number of deployed strategic warheads, from a maximum of 2,200 
down to 1,550 for each country, the most significant step toward 
disarmament in years. The treaty is far from perfect. In fact, I am 
disappointed that it places no restrictions on the development of 
missile defense programs which have delivered little bang for the 
taxpayer buck over the last several decades. But it is crucial that our 
Senate colleagues move quickly to ratify this treaty. Hopefully the 
partisan obstructionism that we've seen over and over again on the 
other side of the aisle will be laid aside on this vital matter of 
national security.
  We now have momentum on this issue. The President seized it this week 
with important breakthroughs at the Nuclear Security Summit he hosted 
in Washington. Tomorrow, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs will 
convene an important hearing to discuss stopping the spread of nuclear 
weapons and combating nuclear terrorism.
  We cannot let up, Mr. Speaker, because there is difficult work ahead, 
and because the New START treaty with Russia really doesn't go far 
enough. We can't be satisfied with incremental steps. 1,550 nuclear 
warheads is still 1,550 too many. Just one of them has the power to 
leave carnage so devastating it would make 9/11 look like a minor 
traffic accident.
  In an op-ed written for the Tampa Tribune, the leaders of the group 
Physicians for Social Responsibility reminded us in vivid terms what a 
nuclear strike would mean, and I quote:
  ``A single Hiroshima-sized bomb detonated by terrorists in New York 
City could kill over 250,000 people and cause somewhere between $2 
trillion and $10 trillion in damage.''
  They continue:
  ``A large-scale nuclear exchange with Russia would kill more than 100 
million Americans in the first half-hour. Clouds of dust and soot would 
block out the sun, and in a matter of days the average temperature 
across the globe would plummet 18 degrees Fahrenheit, to levels not 
seen on Earth since the depth of the last ice age. In this nuclear 
winter, agriculture would cease to exist throughout the northern 
hemisphere, and billions of people would starve in the following 
months.''

                              {time}  1930

  Mr. Speaker, nothing less than the future of the human race hangs in 
the balance here. That's why the New START must be the start and not 
the end of our commitment to eliminate nuclear weaponry once and for 
all.

                          ____________________