Blog

Former assistant secretary of state Stephen G. Rademaker wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post about a third voting option available to senators as they deliberate on the new START.

Rather than voting a straight yes, senators may vote yes, contingent on certain conditions. If treaty supporters have the required two-thirds vote, however, they can try to deny this option to senators who request more information before voting.

Rademaker illustrates the point by reminding us how the Senate voted on the 1999 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

“In that case, Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) threatened to obstruct all work in the Senate unless the Republican leadership agreed to schedule a yes-or-no vote. The Republican leadership acquiesced. With senators forced to choose between just two options, 48 voted yes — while 51 voted no.

“Many arms-control supporters realized afterward that they had made a huge mistake. They came to compare their approach on the test-ban treaty unfavorably to the tack they had taken two years earlier on the Chemical Weapons Convention.

“When that convention was under consideration, they recognized from the outset that many senators had reservations. So supporters engaged in a formal process with potential opponents over a period of months, identifying their individual concerns and negotiating language to address those concerns in the resolution of approval. The convention was approved 74 to 26.”

According to Rademaker, Republican senators asked the administration to share the negotiating record for the new START, and the administration has refused. They asked Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair John Kerry to call a list of nine witnesses to testify, and only one of the nine was invited.

“[I]f treaty critics aren’t going to be accommodated on questions of process, they almost certainly aren’t going to be accommodated on substance. This is regrettable, because while the critics have raised serious substantive concerns, most of those concerns could be addressed in a properly crafted resolution of approval.”

Whatever concerns Republicans have about the treaty can be addressed with resolutions that limit restrictions. But the majority is playing hard politics, with little inclination to achieve a strong bipartisan vote on START.