Michele Kearney's Nuclear Wire: Republican

Showing posts with label Republican. Show all posts

Monday, January 10, 2011

Graham, DeMint: Recycle nation’s nuke waste in SC

Graham, DeMint push for reprocessing at Savannah River Site
The Blue Ribbon Panel on America's Nuclear Future should consider utilizing the Savannah River Site in South Carolina to reprocess used nuclear fuel, according to the state's Republican senators, Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint. "I'm very willing for the Savannah River Site to be the research and the development facility for the nation to make that idea a reality," said Graham. "The goal of reprocessing and recycling is to reduce your storage footprint, right?"
Read more: http://www.thestate.com/2011/01/08/1636053/graham-demint-recycle-nations.html#ixzz1Ag8zVwpZ

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

US Senate to open START debate

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_Senate_to_open_START_debate_999.html Washington (AFP) Dec 14, 2010 President Barack Obama's Democratic allies in the US Senate said Tuesday they would kick off formal debate on a landmark nuclear arms control pact with Russia and predicted its ratification this year. Obama has made the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) a lynchpin of his drive to "reset" relations with Moscow, and called for passage this year in what would be a signal diplomatic victory two months after an elections rout.
Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters he could bring up START late in the day or on Wednesday despite stiff objections from Republicans who say there is not enough time for a full debate.
Asked whether the accord would net the 67 votes needed for ratification and whether he would bring the agreement to a vote this year, as Obama has requested, Reid replied: "Yes. The answer is yes on both."
Obama's Democratic allies currently control 58 Senate seats, and need nine of the 42 Republicans to reach the 67 votes needed for approval -- but that number rises to 14 when a new Congress arrives in January.
The agreement -- which has the support of virtually every present and former US foreign policy or national security heavyweight -- restricts each nation to a maximum of 1,550 deployed warheads, a cut of about 30 percent from a limit set in 2002, and 800 launchers and bombers.
The agreement, which has broad American public support, would also return US inspectors who have been unable to monitor Russia's arsenal since the agreement's predecessor lapsed in December 2009.
"I believe we can pass the START treaty if we get a chance to (vote), the key is to get it going," Democratic Senator John Kerry, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman and the accord's lead champion, told reporters.
"It's on the agenda, we want to get it done but the key is sort of when we wrap up what," Kerry said, citing ongoing battles over tax cuts, government spending bills, and other matters with the 2010 legislative clock ticking.
Just three Republicans have publicly said they will back the treaty, but others have broadly signalled that they will support the accord as long as Democrats allow suitable time for debate.
The Republican point-man on the treaty, Senator Jon Kyl, has publicly said that he has not yet made up his mind, but his office has bombarded journalists with news articles critical of the accord and opinion pieces urging its defeat.
While Republicans were highly unlikely to muster the 51 votes needed to amend the treaty -- effectively killing it by forcing new talks with Moscow -- a source said they planned a series of politically difficult amendment votes.
Two Republican sources said they would try to strike language in the accord's non-binding preamble that declares there is a relationship between offensive nuclear weapons and missile defenses.
Republicans have charged that the accord may handcuff US missile defense plans fiercely opposed by Russia, though the Pentagon and arms experts of both parties have flatly denied any such impact.
And the White House has responded to worries from Kyl and others about funding the upkeep of the US nuclear arsenal by budgeting some 84.1 billion dollars over ten years for modernization and maintence.
The Russian lower house of parliament, the State Duma, has indicated it will ratify the treaty only after its ratification by the US Senate.

Saturday, November 6, 2010

Future For “New START” Murky After Election -- Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration appears to face an even more daunting challenge in convincing the Senate to ratify a U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control treaty in the wake of this week's election results. How GOP gains in the chamber will impact the pact's chances, though, might not be known for weeks or months (see GSN, Nov. 4).

Proponents of "New START" urged the Senate to quickly bring the treaty to a vote, while skeptics argued for caution and more deliberation.

Read more ....

More News On Calls To Ratify The New Start Treaty

With Republicans gaining Senate seats, arms control advocates worried about nuclear weapons treaty -- CTNow
White House Pushes START Ratification Before New Congress Arrives -- Radio Free Europe
Obama urges Congress to vote on new START treaty by year end -- Xinhuanet
Obama hopes START treaty will pass Congress soon -- AFP
Obama: Hopes Russia arms pact ratified this year -- Reuters
Midterms 2010: Hillary Clinton wants 'lame-duck’ Congress to pass Start treaty -- The Telegraph
Kerry urges START ratification by end of year -- Politico
Russia Fears ‘Reset’ of Relations With U.S. -- Wall Street Journal
Abroad, Fear That Midterm Result May Turn U.S. Inward -- New York Times
National Review: Off To A Lame START -- NPR

Friday, November 5, 2010

Sign of the Times: Hearings on “Scientific Fraud” of Global Warming Expected FireDogLake

So the Republicans run and win a campaign in a treacherous economic environment, when people are desperate for something tangible to improve their situation in life. And the Republicans will start that new era by putting science on trial.

Fresh off a dramatic victory in which it retook the House leadership, the Republican Party intends to hold major hearings probing the supposed “scientific fraud” behind global climate change.
The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder related the news in a little-noticed article Wednesday morning.
The effort is a likely attempt to out-step the White House on energy policy moving forward. Legislation on energy and climate change reform, one of President Barack Obama campaign promises, has yet to materialize, though Obama’s EPA recently classified carbon dioxide as a pollutant.
Holding hearings would please the Republicans’ conservative base, which increasingly doubts the scientific basis for global warming — especially human-induced global warming — and provide a reflection of the new GOP’s tenor.

What this Scopes Monkey trial for climate change won’t do is create one new job or improve one life in America. Well, maybe some climate denier whose new book could get a bump.
If show trials are really the answer the GOP thinks they have to the question of how to govern the country, this House majority could be a blip. More at:
http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/11/03/sign-of-the-times-hearings-on-scientific-fraud-of-global-warming-expected/

Thursday, November 4, 2010

The Will and the Wallet Budget Insights for Foreign Affairs and Defense Policy Expecting the Unexpected: Defense and Foreign Affairs Budgets in the New Congress

Posted on November 3, 2010
by Gordon Adams
http://thewillandthewallet.org/2010/11/03/expecting-the-unexpected-defense-and-foreign-affairs-budgets-in-the-new-congress/

Not all Congress’ are alike. And this one is likely to be a unique mix of the old and the new when it comes to defense and international affairs spending. The consequences for defense and international affairs budgets and for the future of US global engagement will be striking.
On the defense side, it looks, at first glance, like business-as-usual. HASC Chairman Ike Skelton is gone, but the memory of how the committee does much of its business will linger on. The tone in the House will be significantly different. On the ideological side, there will be an aggressive push on such issues as Iranian sanctions and endgame, the start of an Afghanistan build-down, missile defense, terrorism, support for Israel, and getting tough with China. The incoming Republican leadership have already made that clear.
On the money, though, business for the HASC and for the defense appropriators will look much the same. The administration will send up an FY 2012 budget that asks too much for defense, and the House committees will want to match, even raise this opening bid, to ensure members’ preferences are met. Leadership and membership changes on these committees will not change that ages-old process and all the Tea Party opposition to earmarks in the world won’t keep them out of the bill.
The same cannot be said for the foreign affairs committees. The switch from Berman to Ros-Lehtinen at the HFAC and Lowey to Granger at the HAC-SFO ensure a change both in tone and in substance. All the above ideological agenda could come to the fore in the HFAC, along with such issues as future relations with Cuba.
And here, Tea Party concerns are likely to add support to a general Republican distrust of the State Department and, especially, of foreign assistance. The Berman agenda of foreign aid reform is probably a dead letter now. And the Obama administration’s goal of doubling foreign assistance, already in doubt, will not even tempt the new majority at the State/Foreign Operations subcommittee.
Pressures from outside the committees will have a big impact on how this plays out. Things may be quite different at the broader budget level. Deficit reduction politics is coming, driven by real economic necessities and the politics of a “deal.” Don’t look for the conservatives and the Tea Party to come out of the gates with full-throated support for high levels of defense spending. They want smaller government, lower deficits, less debt, and lower taxes, and they want these things now.
The politics of this debate will be confusing and ugly for the next year. The lame duck may put the FY 2011 issue off the table, just to get the old crew out of town. But the new crew is going to wrestle the FY 2012 budget at great length. And, given the reality that the Republicans do not control the Senate or the executive branch, they cannot get their way on this bigger budgetary agenda without cutting a deal.
And a deal is only possible if everything is on the table, including defense. Foreign policy funding will pay an awful price, and there is likely to be a broad willingness to let that happen, sadly. But, as the President’s debt commission and the Rivlin-Domenici commission (at the Bipartisan Policy Council) have signaled for months, a Democratic-Republican deal will only happen if all the spigots are turned off together.
So watch in the next six months for the worm to turn, even though the path will be confusing. Foreign policy budgets have reached their high mark, in all likelihood, implying a strong need for a reassessment of how State and USAID carry out their missions, a process starting with the forthcoming Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review. And, for all the desires of the House committees, defense budgets have also peaked and will start down in the next year, too, forcing a much-needed rethink of US military missions and the way in which the US uses its military tools in the post-Iraq/Afghanistan War issue.
Should be an interesting year.

Gordon Adams is a Professor in the US Foreign Policy Program at the School of International Service, American University. He is also a Distinguished Fellow at the Stimson Center. For media inquiries, contact him at gadams@american.edu.

Russian MPs cool on missile treaty after US vote: official

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russian_MPs_cool_on_missile_treaty_after_US_vote_official_999.html

Moscow (AFP) Nov 3, 2010 A Russian parliamentary committee has withdrawn its recommendation to ratify a new nuclear disarmament treaty with the United States after the results of the mid-term polls, an official said Wednesday. President Barack Obama and his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev signed the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty in April but the accord has still to be ratified by the Russian lower house, the State Duma, or the US Senate.
The passage of the treaty -- which envisages major nuclear weapons cuts -- through the Senate already looked complicated before the elections and the polls have seen Republicans pick up seats at the expense of Democrats.
"The foreign affairs commission has taken this decision (to withdraw its recommendation)," said the chairman of the Russian Duma's foreign affairs committee Konstantin Kosachev.
"If the 'lame duck' senators from the old make-up cannot do this in the next weeks then the chances of ratification in the new Senate will be radically lower than they were until now," he told the Interfax news agency.
The decision means the committee will restart the process of reviewing the treaty.
By early Wednesday, the Republicans had 46 seats in the US Senate against 51 for the Democrats out of 100 seats. US Senate ratification for presidential treaties requires 67 votes, with Republicans traditionally less enthusiastic on diplomatic advances with Russia.
The new treaty is a cornerstone of a much-touted "reset" in relations under Obama and the failure of the legislative chambers to ratify the treaty risks turning into a major diplomatic embarrassment.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Lugar Concerned About Ratification of START from GSN Daily News by By Sara Sorcher

WASHINGTON -- Senate Foreign Relations ranking member Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) expressed concern yesterday that a lack of focus on the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia during the midterm elections season may mean the arms pact doesn't get ratified during the Senate's lame-duck session next month (see GSN, Oct. 22).

(Oct. 28) - Russian Topol-M ICBMs, shown on display during a parade rehearsal in Moscow's Red Square in May. The U.S. Senate might fail in the period following next month's election to ratify a new nuclear arms control treaty with Russia, a top GOP senator said yesterday (Alexander Nemenov/Getty Images).

More at:
http://gsn.nti.org/gsn/nw_20101028_4037.php

Friday, October 22, 2010

Senators Taking Seats in November Could Affect "New START" Vote from GSN Daily News

Several Democratic senators are expected to vacate their seats right after next month's midterm election, enabling their replacements to potentially ensnare an Obama administration bid to win Senate approval of a new nuclear arms control treaty with Russia before other newly elected lawmakers take their seats in January, Foreign Policy reported (see GSN, Oct. 20).
President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in April signed "New START," which requires their nations to each cut deployed strategic nuclear weapons to 1,550 warheads, down from the maximum of 2,200 allowed by 2012 under an earlier agreement. They must both also restrict their active nuclear delivery vehicles to 700, with another 100 platforms allowed in reserve.
The pact is awaiting a ratification vote in the Senate, where the 67 votes required for passage must include at least eight Republicans in this Congress. A significant number of Republicans have expressed reservations over the treaty, and anticipated party gains could raise the number of required GOP supporters to between 16 and 18 in the next Congress if the ratification process dragged into 2011, according to Foreign Policy.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called for a vote during the current Congress's "lame-duck" session between the Nov. 2 election and Christmas; however, lawmakers elected in Delaware, Illinois and West Virgina are set to take seats immediately after next month's vote, making their positions on the treaty key to its ratification prospects.
Democrat Chris Coons, now the leading Senate candidate in Delaware, has not taken a public stance on the arms pact. Republican rival Christine O'Donnell, though, pledged in an e-mail statement to "look very carefully at any treaty before the U.S. Senate."
"There is nothing wrong in principle with reducing nuclear weapons as long as it is verifiable and we ensure that we can meet all of our defense requirements. There are several concerns with New START treaty as it stands before the U.S. Senate right now," O'Donnell wrote in the statement, referring to missile defense language in the pact, Russian efforts to curb Iranian atomic activities and the Obama administration's commitment to refurbishing U.S. nuclear weapons. "Before I could vote in support of New START, each of these concerns would have to be fully addressed," she said.
Representative Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), who showed a slight lead in a recent poll, has not taken a stance on the treaty, according to a statement by his office. Kirk has worked with Democrats in the past on security matters, suggesting he could support the agreement's ratification, according to Foreign Policy. Illinois Democratic Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias in an e-mail said he would endorse the pact.
West Virginia Democrat Joseph Manchin, who polled ahead of his Republican competitor by a thin margin, would consider the positions of "our commanders and generals on the ground" in formulating his position on the treaty, according to a statement by his office. Republican candidate John Raese opposes the treaty, a spokesman said.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) probably would not allow a vote on New START to proceed unless the White House verified 67 senators were in favor of ratification, Foreign Policy reported. Such a vote was one of a number of "possible" items the Senate could take up during the lame-duck period, according to one Senate leadership staffer.
"We're taking nothing for granted and we're addressing every concern and giving every reassurance where we can," an Obama administration official said. "That's where we are" (Josh Rogin, Foreign Policy, Oct. 21).
Meanwhile, Russia yesterday denied allegations that it had negotiated an undisclosed deal with the United States linked to New START, RIA Novosti reported.
"No secret arrangements beyond the limits of what is written in the document and its appendixes exist," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said (RIA Novosti, Oct. 22).
"I can only tell you one thing: everything we had agreed on is fixed in the treaty and in the ample appendixes to this treaty. This is an open document," the Xinhua News Agency quoted him as saying (Xinhua News
http://gsn.nti.org/gsn/nw_20101022_8525.phpAgency, Oct. 21).