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 …

Earlier this year, both relevant House and Senate subcommittees decided to fully fund Non proliferation programs despite the current economic climate and competing funding demands.

However, the first Continuing Resolution passed at the end of September to fund the government through December 3 funded most government programs at FY 2010 levels, including programs to secure and safeguard nuclear weapons and materials.

In response, the Fissile Materials Working Group (FMWG) put together a letter to members urging them to fully fun these crucial programs at FY-2011 levels. You can find the text to the letter below.

Dear Colleague,

We urge you to support funding for threat reduction and nonproliferation
programs at FY 2011 requested levels in the next continuing resolution or
omnibus appropriations bill that Congress must pass to fund the
government. This funding is a necessary step to achieve the cooperative
international effort to secure all vulnerable nuclear, chemical and biological
materials in the foreseeable future.

Most experts agree that the threat of nuclear terrorism is the greatest peril
facing our country today. Twenty countries are believed to possess bombgrade
nuclear material that is not secure. Nuclear security will require a
global effort, but U.S. leadership is critical.

In April 2010, the President convened an unprecedented Nuclear Security
Summit in Washington D.C. during which the leaders of 47 nations pledged
their support for the four-year goal and made promises to take concrete
measures toward achieving it. Numerous bipartisan reports have outlined
the urgency of the danger and warned that more needs to be done to ensure
that terrorists never obtain a nuclear weapon or materials usable for a
nuclear device.

In FY 2011, the Obama administration requested $3.1 billion for
international WMD security programs, a $320 million increase over the FY
2010 budget. The FY 2011 request includes significant increases for key
threat-reduction and nonproliferation programs at the National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA) and the Department of Defense, including
the Global Threat Reduction Initiative, the International Material Protection
and Cooperation Program, and the “Nunn-Lugar” Cooperative Threat
Reduction Program.

Earlier this year, both relevant House and Senate subcommittees decided to
fully fund these important programs despite the current economic climate
and competing funding demands.

However, the first Continuing Resolution passed at the end of September to
fund the government through December 3 funded most government
programs at FY 2010 levels, including programs to secure and safeguard
nuclear weapons and materials. This was a setback to efforts to prevent
nuclear terrorism because the overall funding request and congressional
appropriations for threat reduction in FY 2010 was actually less than the
amount Congress appropriated in FY 2009.

There is a bipartisan consensus that limiting access to vulnerable nuclear
weapons-usable materials will greatly reduce the threat of nuclear terrorism.

The global financial cost and terrible destruction of a nuclear terrorist attack would dwarf the costs ofpreventing such an attack.

We urge you to ensure that threat reduction and nonproliferation programs at NNSA and the Department ofDefense are funded at the FY 2011 level for the remainder of the fiscal year. Our national security demands it.

Sincerely,

Matthew Bunn
Project on Managing the Atom
Harvard Kennedy School of Government

David Culp
Friends Committee on National Legislation

Charles Ferguson
Federation of American Scientists

Howard L. Hall
The University of Tennessee

John Isaacs
Council for a Livable World

Daryl G. Kimball
Arms Control Association

Alan J. Kuperman
University of Texas at Austin

Kenneth Luongo
Partnership for Global Security

Vlad Sambaiew
The Stanley Foundation

Paul Walker
Global Green USA

Jim Walsh
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Peter Wilk, MD
Physicians for Social Responsibility

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?).

The tendentious 22 (actually only 21 Senators are listed, perhaps because the Ensign office could not read one of the signatures) :

John Ensign (NV)
Jim DeMint (SC)
Mike Enzi (WY)
Kit Bond (MO)
Jim Bunning (KY)
David Vitter (LA)
John Barrasso (WY)
James Inhofe (OK)
Roger Wicker (MS)
Mike Johanns (NE)
John Cornyn (TX)
Richard Shelby (AL)
Richard Burr (NC)
Sam Brownback (KS)
 Pat Roberts (KS)
Orrin Hatch (UT)
John Thune (SD)
Mike Crapo (ID)
James Risch (ID)
Tom Coburn (OK)
Chuck Grassley.(IA)

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 — inc…

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.”

Sure, he is holding New START hostage to tax cuts and appropriations bills.

Details, details.

But that the biggest opening he has left all year.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), the once and future President, added:  “I believe that we could move forward with the START treaty and satisfy Senator Kyl’s concerns and mine about missile defense and others.”

It might not be “I Love You,” but it is a good, well, maybe I will like you in the morning.

Tennessee Senator Bob Corker joined the chorus. Cornered by reporters, he said:
“I thought they [the Obama administration] did a good job. I think it’s continuing to evolve in a good way as it relates to modernization . . . Could we finish? I think it’s possible that we could.”

Good for him.

Retiring Ohio Senator George Voinovich (R-OH), who has railed against the treaty as undermining Central European countries that once were Soviet satellites, now has changed his tune.

“In an interview with Washington Wire, Mr. Voinovich said unified support out of the Lisbon summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization this month convinced him that Europe, especially Eastern Europe, wants the treaty. He had based his concerns on his belief that the treaty’s ratification could bring a return to Russian dominance of Eastern and Southeastern Europe. ‘There seems to be a lot of coming together there and a lot more comfort [with the treaty] among our friends and allies in Europe,’ Mr. Voinovich said. ‘I think I’d be supportive.’”

Finally, there is the brand newest Senator, Mark Kirk (R-IL), ever cautious but sort of semi-positive: “I’m open-minded and this is one of the issues I’ll raise with the State Department briefing teams coming up to talk to me.”

Does this add up to 67 votes? Not yet, but stayed turned.

It’s not over until the fat Senator sings.

Sources for these quotes:
http://yhoo.it/gdit8u
http://on.wsj.com/hfs3If