among the senate foreign relations committee comes in a armed services committee and senate select committee of that process was developed the resolution of ratification that led to the successful vote in the senate foreign relations committee on the 14 to four in favor of the treaty. new s.t.a.r.t. is the best interest of national security. to reestablish provisions that of seasons the exploration of s.t.a.r.t. a year ago and will continue the international arms control of non-proliferation framework that the united states has worked hard to foster and strengthen over the past 50 years. without it, our knowledge of russian strategic versus will erode over time, increasing risks of misunderstanding, mistrust and worst-case analysis and policymaking. as general chilton, today's commander of the u.s. strategic command has said, without new s.t.a.r.t., would rapidly losing fight to russian strategical forces and our force modernization planning and hedging strategy would be more complex and more costly. the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty is in our best national security interest and i believe there is e

well bill we've heard the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee john kerry as you said say the plan they plan on taking out the start for debate within the next few hours we have the head of the senate majority harry reid saying they will get the star done in this congressional session even if it means working until christmas or maybe even beyond the holidays that acquits are really racing against the clock here to pass through a number of priorities there are other domestic issues on the agenda of the senate and some republicans are bringing up this lack of time argument to put off the ratification i even heard one senators say they would take up the start for debating this session but would put off the vote until next year but one can barely understand why this uncertainty considering this tremendous support that the new start has received over the last eight months of meticulous series the country's military top officials former president the president they all said it's a win win treaty and yet it could be bogged down and not in its substance but in politics of the day

yet if if christine o'donnell is on the senate foreign relations committee god bless our country god bless me i don't want her talking to overseas leaders but i don't think going to happen and i don't wish to be elected and i don't think hillary clinton would even take a call if she was just i mean i think you know you have best friend yes you know if you have your bags with hillary clinton at home want to be fast with hillary clinton's going to happen size i think she's kind of delusional i mean i i would say she's delusional i mean you're spot on there i mean do. woman this campaign has been the most fun to watch and it's one if even if the republicans have a wave election and sweep i don't think she's going to be swept into office because she's crazy and she proved it to us once again i want to move on now to another congressional hopeful this guy is a texas g.o.p. candidate his name is steven road and he's not a big fan of the government these days right i mean none of these aspiring politicians are fans of the government these days they're always doing something wrong but he was

the senate foreign relations committee held 12 hearings on the treaty. and, as you pointed out, there were another nine held by other committees. in contrast, there were only four committee hearings held by the sort treaty and only eight held on start ii. the foreign relations committee also accomodated some member concerns earlier this year by delaying a vote on the treaty during the august recess and the obama administration has answered over 900 questions for the record on new start. nearly every major foreign policy or national security expert has weighed in on the treaty either in testimony, briefings, or in the press. now, the history of treaties like new start shows that the concern that there isn't enough time on the floor to consider this treaty just does not -- just is not accurate. in general arm control agreements take an average of two to five days of floor time. the original start treaty which was much more complicated and complex and the first of its kind took only five days of floor debate. start ii took two days of floor consideration. t

treaty for a half, not just for six days.te 60 members of the united states senate, armed servicesna committee, foreign relationsommittee, national intelligence committee, the national security working group, which i cochaired with senator kyl, have all met and considered this treaty. some people have gone to geneva and actually met with the negotiators and the negotiators have met with this here before the treaty was ebert. we were weighing in on thisvmen treaty and we have considered it in over 21 hearings and meetings over the course of the last month. this is not six days. let's not kid the american peo people. this is not sixs days. three other treaties, one of which had no verification aty all. bad treaty received the 95-0 vote. the american people voted for us to stop the politics. they voted for us to act like adults and do the business of this country and i believe voting on this treaty and theseo next hours of the day is our opportunity to live up to the hopes of the american people. i yield the floor. >> the senator from indiana.eat >> mr. president, a great deal of our day will be spent onin discussi

every sine one of the members of the senate foreign relations committee voted to have treaties reportedwhat do you expect if they are not given a full, balanced information to make judgments? it is hardly surprising that you get these kind of lopsided votes. the membership of that committee is somewhat better than it used to bait. the membershi is basically fairly left-leaning. this has been historically a problem. it is unfortunate that it is reinforced by the way the chairman of the committee, sometimes the ranking member as well, have run the committee. host: new mexico, are democrats blind. think youreally don't have much of any credibility given year history of support for the iraq invasion, didn't you trying to get people to believe that saddam hussein was involved in 9/11 and even the oklahoma city bombing. you are one of the neo conservatives who is bankrupting this country, trying t support a worldwide empire. i find that you have absolute zero credibility. guest: i have always regarded ad hominem attacks as reinforcing my point that we need to have more debate about things lik

haired brown explained this when he said this is the case in testimony before the senate foreign relations committee on the original start treaty and that, mr. president, was october of 1991. he said "verification will become even more important as the numbers of strategic nuclear weapons on each side decreases because uncertainties of a given size become a larger percentage of the total forces occurs." that was way back in 1991. since then, you have -- you had former yuj secretary of state for arms control and international security john bolton, he stated this year on may 3, he said that "while verification is important in any arms control treaty, verification becomes even more important at lower wore head levels." they all agreement. we're talking about going all the way back to 1991. in 1997 bent scowcroft and arnold canter said "current force levels provide a kind of buffer because they are high enough for relatively intensive -- insensitive to imperfect intelligence and modest force changes. as force levels go down, the balance of nuclear power can become increasingly delicate and vulnerable to

well when i was in the senate for twelve years on the senate foreign relations committee intelligence committees i never impugned or questioned the motives of any other senators but i would say this in answer your question i think the realisation that the a mince knowledge base was all in favor of ratification those over the years for the united states government who had responsibility for nuclear weapons and for strategies and for foreign policy all were overwhelmingly in support of this if for no other reason than it was clearly in the interest of the united states as well as russia so i think in the end. which is always supposed to be the case in theory that knowledge and information won out over politics what is good i mean do you think for president obama now that he's succeeded in pushing this treaty through his. well of course this is a significant accomplishment for this new president but i think as he indicated this was an issue that was about the future of america the future of the world this was a treaty that was about the interests of our country far above the political in

senator risch and i serve on the foreign relations committee together. i am the chairman of the subcommittee on the near east and south and central asia. senator risch is our ranking member. we work well together. i think we have a basic disagreement about this amendment, and let me make some arguments about the amendment. this amendment involves what are known as tactical nuclear weapons. i recognize the importance of addressing the basic imbalance that exists with respect to the russians and the scores of tactical nuclear weapons at their disposal. it's important that upon ratification of the new start accord that we proceed quickly to negotiations with the russians on tactical nuclear weapons. but as we engage in this debate, it's also very important to clearly define what we're talking about for the american people. the congressional research service says that the united states and the soviet union, what we used to call the soviet union, both deployed thousands of -- quote -- "nonstrategic nuclear weapons during the cold war that were intended to be u

shoe of trust and america's reputation globally was addressed by the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee every senator has an obligation to ask that question of themselves over the course of these next days are we a credible partner. can other nations rely on us what happens when the prez the united states to go sure it's a treaty and he comes back here and the rest of the world sees the truth. not in the substance of the treaty. but in the politics of the day and if the treaty does get bogged down this year chances are the new senate which is going to be more republican and obama hosts tile who put off the new start indefinitely maybe for months or even years to get a check on our t. washington d.c. . well democratic party strategist robert wiener says the main reason the treaty is not ratified yet is down to republicans election fly co mentality it would be stupid for the republicans to continue to block it but then again they want to block everything in the past republicans used to work with democrats now since a new game they've been wanting to kill everything break publicans have le

shoe of trust and america's reputation globally was addressed by the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee every senator has an obligation to ask that question of themselves over the course of these next days are we a credible partner can other nations rely on us what happens when the present united states negotiates a treaty and he comes back here and the rest of the world sees that a treaty bogged down not in the substance of the treaty. but in the politics of the day and if the treaty does get bogged down this year chances are the new senate which is going to be more republican and obama hosts will put off the new start indefinitely maybe for months or even years going to check on our t. washington d.c. i spoke to nuclear nonproliferation. when he explained to me why the treaty significance we did will definitely be approved it confirms that the u.s. russia relationship will remain on track i think the second thing is that it maintains the new core stability that we've had some see end of the cold war importantly the start treaty maintains and monitoring and verification measures that a

at least six to seven out of one hundred votes and here is what the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee said this would not have happened without bipartisanship and i'm very grateful to a number of senators will talk about that maybe a little more tomorrow on the other side who. decided that this was the moment for the national security interests of our country that this issue did not belong in our politics but rather in our minds terms of how we protect the nation while senator kerry also said that they do count on seventy votes approval he also said that those seventy votes today in today's congress are like ninety five votes in the past you of course was referring to the past votes on the previous arms reduction treaty which received no laughs and. so much is at stake and yet the treaty has received so much opposition a number of republicans really went out of their way to undermine it what is interesting without having substantial arguments against it and their actions have provoked an avalanche of criticism from the country's top security experts we feared that the treaty could bec

a completely different day should not start does this mean that the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee john kerry made a wrong statement this morning saying the treaty will be taken out for debate later today we really don't know and hopefully he will clarify where the senate is where the senators are standing on the new start and a press conference that we're expecting in about two hours from now so far we have they had of the senate majority harry reid saying that they will get the start done in this congressional session even if it means working until christmas maybe even beyond the holidays as he said democrats are greasing against the clock here to pass through a number of priorities there are other domestic issues on the agenda of the senate and some republicans are bringing up this lack of time are given to put off the ratification i haven't heard one senators say they would take up the start for debate in this session but would put off the vote until next year but one can barely understand why this uncertainty considering all the tremendous support that the new star has receive

have trost than america's reputation globally was addressed by the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee every senator has an obligation to ask that question of themselves over the course of these next days are we a credible partner can other nations rely on us what happens when the president and states negotiates a treaty and he comes back here and the rest of the world sees that treaty bogged down not in the substance of the treaty but in the politics of the day and if the treaty does get bogged down this year chances are the new senate which is going to be more republican and obama hosts tile will put off the new start indefinitely maybe for months or even years to get a check on our t. washington d.c. policy analyst james lewis says failure to ratify the deal will undermine global efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. if the treaty has not passed the the most dangerous ratification is that the terror that those safeguards will continue and those inspections will continue to lapse between the united states and russia and then beyond that our policy between the united state

foreign policy priorities. the two senators responsible for getting the votes for that treaty are with me this morning. democratic chairman of the senate foreign relations committee, senator john kerry the ranking republican, senator richard lugar. gentlemen, thank you very much. indeed, before we get to the upcoming business of s.t.a.r.t., let's talk about the repeal of don't ask, don't tell. historic. what does this mean for the u.s. military and for the country? >> well, for the country it means that our citizens will no longer have to lie and live a lie on a daily basis or be denied the opportunity to serve their country. gay people have served the united states with distinction. they've won awards. they've given their lives all through our history. we had a policy that asked them to lie about it. they no longer have to do that. i believe it fulfills an enormous promise of equality in our country. it's an historic day. >> senator lugar, you did not vote to repeal don't ask, don't tell and yet the majority, the vast majority, 77% of the american people, say that it's time. why did you not do that? >> i was influenced by those who are in combat presently in afg

schoo of trust in america's reputation globally was addressed by the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee every senator has an obligation to ask that question of themselves over the course of these next days are we a credible partner can other nations rely on us what happens when the present united states negotiates a treaty. and he comes back here and the rest of the world sees that treaty bogged down not in the substance of the treaty but in the politics of the day and if the treaty does get bogged down this year chances are the new senate which is going to be more republican and obama host are will put off the new start indefinitely maybe for months or even years going to check on our t. washington d.c. . the wiki leaks founder has been granted bail by a british court but with strict conditions will stay in jail until another hearing in the next two days as swedish prosecutors are repeating the bell decision so-called wants to extradite him to answer questions of a rape allegations which he denies sweden's chief prosecutor canceled a previous arrest warrant saying there was no reason t

as chair of the senate foreign relations committee, subcommittee on europe, i am intensely focused on meeting our nato security commitments and defending and protecting our allies in nato and beyond. i agree that we need to remain vigilant in support of our allies. especially those in central and eastern europe that border russia and have strong, legitimate security concerns. but a failure to ratify this treaty could result in deteriorating u.s.-russian bilateral relations and adversely affect security of our partners in europe. i was pleased to see just last week at the nato summit in lisbon that all 28 nato allies expressed their unanimous support for senate ratification of the new start treaty. new start is in america's interest and as our allies in europe have stated clearly, new start is also in their interest. finally, a failure to ratify this treaty could have serious negative effects on our ability to meet the nuclear challenge posed by iran. the failure to rat fight start treat -- ratify the start treaty would -- support an exert increasing pressure on iran. and as we heard s

clinton, secretary gates, secretary clinton, said in a letter, "we agree with the senate foreign relations committee's call in the resolution of advice and consent to ratification of the new start treaty to pursue an agreement with the russians to address them." tablght catactical weapons repra thorny issue because it involves the european powers, it involves disparities of geography. it is why it's been so hard to link them in the foos a nuclear treaty -- foos past to a stratc nuclear treaty and why they are not done so in this case. but it is the commitment by the secretary of defense, by the secretary osecretary of state, e president and by the senate to pursue this issue that is important and that is what is before us now. so in terms of addressing this issue, if there are changes that need to be made to the language, to the ratification resolution, that would be appropriate. but ending this treaty, which greatly enhances the security of the united states of america by providing the appropriate verification protocols, is absolutely essential. thank you, mr. president. mr. kerry: mr. president? the

been in the senate. >> democratic senator john kerry of massachusetts, chairman of the senate foreign relations committee, hitting the nail on the head in terms of the requests met and answered and still more delays tonight. sir, thank you for your time. really appreciate it. >> thank you very much, rachel. thank you. >>> so another landmark vote today in the chamber of commerce that does manage to pass stuff. the house today voted again to repeal don't ask, don't tell. that's coming up. >>> plus, why a single day in the first week in january might be the most important day in american politics since the inauguration of barack obama and the last election. that's all still ahead. of the spoons. >> got it. >> bang 'er back and forth. there you go. yeah. >> yeah, this is going really great. oh, this is actually not bad. >> how's that, eh? >> holy...spoons. >> introducing cisco umi. be together in high def on your tv. exclusively at best buy's magnolia stores. cisco. >>> on this vote, the yeas are 250, the nays are 175. the motion is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table

every single one of the members of the senate foreign relations committee voted to have treaties reportedf they are not given a full, balanced information to make judgments? it is hardly surprising that you get these kind of lopsided votes. the membership of that committee is somewhat better than it used to bait. the membership is basically fairly left-leaning. this has been historically a problem. it is unfortunate that it is reinforced by the way the chairman of the committee, sometimes the ranking member as well, have run the committee. host: new mexico, are democrats blind. think youreally don't have much of any credibility given year history of support for the iraq invasion, didn't you trying to get people to believe that saddam hussein was involved in 9/11 and even the oklahoma city bombing. you are one of the neo conservatives who is bankrupting this country, trying to support a worldwide empire. i find that you have absolute zero credibility. guest: i have always regarded ad hominem attacks as reinforcing my point that we need to have more debate about things like this treaty. i w

treaty for a year and a half not just six days. 60 members of the united states senate, armed forces, foreign relation committeeational intelligence committee national security working group which i cochair with senator kyl have all met and considered this treaty. some people have gone to meet with the negotiators. the negotiators met with us here before the treaty was signed we were weighing in on the treaty. we considered it in over 21 hearings and meetings over the course. this is not six days. let's not kid the american people. this is not six days. three other treaties, one of which had no verification at all. that treaty received the 95-0 vote. the american people voted for us to stop the politics. they voted for us to act like adults and do the business of that country. and i believe voting on this treaty in the next hours and days is our opportunity to live up to the hopes of the american people. i yield the floor. >> senator from indiana. >> mr. president the great deal of the day will be spent on discussing the verification regime on the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty. part of that will be in closed session. b

i thank the chair and yield before. >> remarks from senator of the foreign relations committee john kerry who is chair of the senate foreign relations committee. he made those remarks yesterday. there will be more debate on the s.t.a.r.t. treaty today as senators gavel in to begin debate on the u.s./russia nuclear arms treaty. president obama and the russian president earlier await ratification in the senate. we are live to the u.s. senate floor on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain dr. barry black will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. sovereign god, you see all that happens in our world, as you lead us by your mercies and grace. continue to shower our land with your blessings, protecting us from the forces that hinder freedom. give our lawmakers the wisdom to obey you, striving always to do what is right. may their words be true and sincere and their actions be characterized by honor and respect. help them to keep their promises to you and to one another, no matter how great the challenges may be. enable them to walk securely

the senate foreign relations committee passed the internakt violence against women act. it's a five-year strategy to prevent violence against women and children around the globe. we have with the president and cofounder of women thrive worldwide. she's spent the last three years on the front line to try to get this legislation passed, and it worked. thanks for stopping by today. >> you're welcome. >> give us some context about how large of a problem this is not only in the united states, but worldwide. >> well, it's a bigger epidemic than hiv/aids. one in three women will suffer an act of violence against her in her lifetime. you know, if you've got three friends, you can look at them and say, one of you is going to be a victim of violence at some point. so it is a major public health threat, and a huge issue for women around the world. >> i want to bring up one example. that's of an an iranian woman. she was sentenced to stoning. she was allegedly beaten and sold for sex by her husband. this happens very frequently in certain parts of the world. >> unfortunately it does

republican leader of the senate mitch mcconnell and for the democrats chairman of the senate foreign relations committeets. our political round table coming up on "meet the press". >> the news to watch for the week ahead. tomorrow a federal package panel will hear arguments in california's same six marriage ban prop 8. two hours of arguments it televised nationally on c-span. tomorrow bay area lawmakers will call for greater oversight of party busses. assembly man hill will introduce a law to hold bus companies responsible for keeping booze out of the hands of the 21 and under crowd. the bill was born out of the death of a teenager who drank for hours on a party bus and got behind the wheel of his own car and crashed in a deadly crash. >>> also tomorrow the three people convicted of beating, burning and holding this teenager captive more than a year will be sentenced. the sentencing comes two years after kyle ramirez stumbled into a traci health club nearly naked shack told a chain on his leg. a youth football coach, his wife and the boy's legal guardian pleaded guilty to more than a dozen felonies and

and for the democrats, chairman of the senate foreign relations committee, john kerry of massachusetts. >>> then, america's anxiety. when will the economy turn around? are taxes going up? how vulnerable are we to another terrorist attack? can anything get done in congress? who leads us out in this sense of limbo? our roundtable weighs in, columnist of the "new york times," david brooks, republican strategist mike murphy and the times," david brooks, republican strategist mike murphy and the bbc's katty kay. captions paid for by nbc-universal television >>> good morning. a political showdown yesterday in a special saturday session. blocked tax cuts to the middle class only, which would have raised taxes on higher earners. it seemed to keep a door opened to compromise. >> we need to redouble our efforts to revolve this impasse in the next few days to give the american people the peace of mind that their tacks will not go up on january 1st. it will require some compromise, but i'm confident that we can get it done. >> joining me now exclusively, top republican in the senate, mitch mcconne

the resolution of ratification r approved by the senate foreign relations committee reaffirms that the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty will in no way inhibit our missile defenses. trey it contains an understanding that the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty imposes no limitations on the deployment of u.s. missile defenses other than the requirement to refrain from converting offensive missile launchers. it also states that russia's april 2010 unilateral statements on missile defense does not impose any legal obligations on the united states under any ame further limitations that require senate's advice and consent. 199 consistent with the missile defense act of 1999, it also declares it is u.s. policy to df deploy an effective national and this paramount obligation of the united states to defend his people but the armed forces andb its allies against nuclear attack to the best of itsgn rels ability.gs on in a revealing moment, turn the senate foreign relations committee hearings on thee treaty, secretary gates testified quote, the russiansine have hated missile defense ever since the strategic arms talks beg

the resolution of ratification approved by the senate foreign relations committee reaffirms that the new start treaty will in no way inhibit our missile defenses. it contains an understanding that the new start treaty imposes no limitation on the deployment of u.s. missile defenses, other than the requirement to refrain from converting offensive missile launchers. it also states that russia's april 2010 unilateral statement on missile defense does not impose any legal obligations on the united states and that any further limitations would require treaty amendments subject to the senate's advice and consent. consistent with the missile defense act of 1999, it also declares it is u.s. policy to deploy an effective national missile defense system as soon as technologically possible, and that it is the paramount obligation of the united states to defend its people to the best of its ability. in a revealing moment during the senate foreign relations committee hearings on the treaty, secretary gates testified -- quote -- "the russians have hated missile defense ever since the strategic arm

counterparts and for their efforts in providing the senate with extensive information these past ten months. now, as a member of the foreign relations committee, madam president, i recall last summer senator kerry deferring to several of our colleagues who asked not to even vote in the committee on the subject matter but to wait until we came back. leave a little time over the time to analyze and think about all of this. we did. and then the issue was we would vote on it when we came back after that break. well, no, don't do that because we have an election coming up and it could politicize it. let's just wait until after the election, there will be a lame-duck session and we can all do it then, and here we are. so i -- again, i respect immensely how senator kerry and senator lugar have conducted themselves, respecting the very legitimate issues that have been raised. i don't suggest that the issues are not legitimate, but merely because an issue is legitimate doesn't mean it can't be answered, and then ultimately you have to vote here. no one ever anticipated absolute unanimity that there would be those who felt that this agreement was lacki