As the Obama administration doubles down on its effort to force the U.S. Senate to rubber-stamp the New START Treaty during the lame duck session, its bid took two more body blows today:
First, ten senators-elect led by Roy Blunt of Missouri wrote Majority Leader Harry Reid, declaring:
One of the most important tasks of the 112th Congress will be to carefully consider measures that protect the national security of the United States. And few matters will more directly impact our security than arms control agreements like New START that would dramatically reduce the U.S. nuclear deterrent in a strategic environment that is becoming ever more perilous.
Out of respect for our states’ voters, we believe it would be improper for the Senate to consider the New START Treaty or any other treaty in a lame duck session prior to January 3, 2011. Indeed, no bilateral strategic arms reduction treaty with the Soviet Union or Russia has ever been ratified during a lame duck session.” (Emphasis added.)
Second, three influential members of the Senate Republican caucus in the 111th Congress – Senators Jim DeMint, John Ensign and Christopher “Kit” Bond – made public a letter they have written to their chamber’s Minority Leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell. In it, they formally request to be “consulted before any time agreement or amendment agreements are entered into concerning the New START Treaty.”
This request amounts to the parliamentary equivalent of a shot-across-the-bow of Senator Reid. He is now on notice not only that the Senate’s Minority Whip, Jon Kyl of Arizona, believes that there is inadequate time in the lame-duck session to provide the requisite deliberation and debate on the seriously flawed New START Treaty. He has three other serving senators who are signaling that they will not agree to any unanimous consent agreement that would attempt to foreshorten or otherwise circumscribe consideration of that accord.
As Messrs. DeMint, Ensign and Bond put it:
New START is a complex agreement and will have lasting implications for the national security of this nation. With the limited floor time available before Sine Die [adjournment at the end of the 111th Congress], we want to ensure that a treaty of this magnitude receives significant debate and consideration so that all consequences, both intended and unintended, can be vetted.
In this connection, the Senators noted that:
Recent public remarks by the Chairman of the Duma’s Committee on International Affairs and the Committee’s decision to reconsider its recommendation of ratification due to Russia’s disagreement with the U.S. Senate on the treaty’s inclusion of strategic-range non-nuclear weapon systems, rail-mobile ICBMs, and missile defense, have highlighted the necessity for thorough review and debate.
Messrs. DeMint, Ensign and Bond pointed out that – in addition to the aforementioned ten new members of the next Senate who wish to have a say in a treaty that will have repercussions on their watch – this Senate just had three new members elected to “who have not been afforded the opportunity to examine this treaty and its implications. They should be afforded ample time to study the treaty, the resolution of ratification, hearing transcripts, and all supporting documents on this matter.”
Perhaps most important, the two new letters emphasize that the Obama administration has thus far failed to satisfy what should be a condition-precedent for any Senate debate on this treaty: submission by the executive branch of “the full negotiating record.” The three legislators correctly argue that, “Only by doing this will all Senators be able to make fully informed decisions on amendments and adoption.”
Like their future colleagues, Senators DeMint, Ensign and Bond express their determination to fulfill the constitutional duties of the Senate, declaring: “We take the advice and consent powers granted to the Senate by the founding fathers very seriously. Rushing a matter of this magnitude through the Senate is not what they had in mind when they established this very important check on the executive branch.”
To that end, they put down an important marker with the Senate leadership: “We have numerous amendments to the treaty as well as the resolution of ratification that we will want to adequately debate and receive votes on. It would be unwise and improper to do this in a hurried fashion over the course of only a few days.”
In short, what is shaping up is a defining moment in American history. The elections earlier this month amounted to a great national affirmation of the U.S. Constitution which millions of voters perceive to have been trampled and otherwise dishonored by President Obama and his allies on Capitol Hill. Now, Mr. Obama is proposing yet again to take liberties with one of the most fundamental of constitutional principles – the Senate’s role in treaty-making.
The executive branch’s increasingly panicked effort to buffalo Senators into approving New START in the next few days not only bespeaks its fear that the treaty cannot stand close scrutiny and unfettered, as well as informed, debate. It also makes plain President Obama’s contempt for the Constitution and his determination to dispense with it whenever the document’s vital checks and balances conflict with his agenda. No Senator of either party – whether they have served in the chamber in the past, are doing so at present or will do so starting in January – should tolerate, let alone abet, such behavior.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.