Test of Bipartisanship in Post-Election Session

When the Senate reconvenes on November 15th they will face a test of their willingness to govern. A vote on the New START treaty will be the perfect assessment of Congressional willingness to overcome partisan squabbling and cooperatively bolster U.S. national security. So can the Senate leave the politics of the election behind and pass the New START treaty?

Assistant Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller hinted at this test of bipartisan governance in her remarks at an Arms Control Association event on Monday. “It was a good treaty before the election, and it is a good treaty after the election,” said Gottemoeller. Her point was clear and has been reiterated by many national security officials over the past week. So how good is this treaty? Good enough for 7 former Stratcom commanders for starters, but what else?

To recap, New START reduces the American and Russian deployed nuclear arsenals by 30 percent and places U.S. inspectors back in Russian nuclear sites to monitor their activities. As General Kevin Chilton, the commander of U. S. Strategic Forces, reminds us, “without New START, we would rapidly lose insight into Russian strategic nuclear force developments and activities.” That’s why our military leadership has repeatedly voiced their unanimous support for the treaty. The treaty is also backed by an overwhelming bipartisan coalition of former national security leaders. The vast list of supporters includes patriotic luminaries like former Secretaries of State Madeleine Albright, Henry Kissinger, and George Schultz. In the words of Senator Lugar, “the reason why the START treaty might finally make it is that almost every American statesman or stateswoman of the last 20 years has come to testify that this is important.”

A vote on New START must be bipartisan by nature, as two-thirds of the Senate is required to give its advice and consent on a treaty. New START, therefore, represents the first post-election test for the Senate about whether they can put aside politics in favor of serious action to move the country forward.

The Senate has had the treaty since May, held almost 20 hearings, and the Foreign Relations Committee approved the treaty with a 14-4 bipartisan vote. Still, the treaty has not been brought to a full vote. The midterm elections environment proved too toxic for some Senators and the White House to come to an agreement. Other Senators, like Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ) held up the treaty while negotiating for unrelated funds for the nuclear weapons complex in future budgets.

Now the elections are over, and the money has been doled out. It is time for the Senate to heed the advice of so many national security leaders and decisively act to bolster U.S. national security.

Earlier this week both President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton called for a vote on the treaty in the upcoming session of Congress. Speaking on behalf of the Pentagon, Press Secretary Geoff Morrell also strongly urged the Senate to vote. “This treaty is absolutely critical to the effectiveness of our nuclear arsenal, our knowledge of Russian nuclear capabilities and U.S. national security overall,” said Morrell. “We’re advancing it at this time and pushing for ratification because we need this. And we need it sooner, rather than later.”

Senate partisanship is the last barrier to realizing the security benefits of New START. The Senate returns to work on November 15th. With elections fallout settled and the military asking for the treaty to be ratified, will the yet uncommitted Senators accept their responsibility and give this treaty their vote of approval?

Let’s hope they recognize this opportunity to demonstrate bipartisanship and improve our national security.

-----

This blog is cross-posted from The Prague Project.

The Prague Project