-
WHY YOU SHOULD BECOME A MEMBERBy becoming a member of The Heritage Foundation with your tax-deductible gift of $25 or more, you will join hundreds of thousands of conservatives around the nation in supporting our work to build an America where freedom, prosperity, opportunity and civil society flourish.
Since 1973, we have been working to advance the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.
Our hard work has paid off time and again. Since our founding, we have seen substantial gains for the conservative agenda and The Heritage Foundation has swelled to include nearly 400,000 members. In fact, our work would not have been possible without our members’ support.
» Read more about Heritage’s achievements
-
What Are the Problems with the New START Treaty?7/27/2010At the height of the debate over Obamacare, when the White House's leftist allies were in full panic mode, The Washington Post's Ezra Klein accused Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) of being "willing to cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people." Lieberman's crime? He opposed including an expansion of Medicare in the health regulation bill. Now that the President's signature foreign policy achievement, the New START nuclear agreement with Russia, is on the ropes, the left is again back to their hyperbolic ways. Ploughshares Fund president Joseph Cirincione told The Associated Press last week: "A delayed ratification with a close vote would be a blow to U.S. leadership around the world. People would doubt the President's ability to negotiate other agreements."
The histrionics are the result of a sudden surge of concerns over the treaty that started with a blast from Mitt Romney who declared the treaty "Obama’s worst foreign policy mistake." Sens. John Kerry (D-MA) and Carl Levin (D-MI) attempted to shoot down Romney's concerns, but their responses raised more questions than they answered. Romney has responded to his critics by identifying eight problems with New START that must be resolved before the Senate can vote on the treaty. We'll focus on three today:

New START Weakens Our Missile Defense Capabilities: The Washington Post editorial board asserted yesterday that "attempts by Moscow to insert [limits on missile defense] into the treaty failed." This is just plain false. First, even the Post admits that the preamble links missile defense and offensive nuclear weapons. The Post says that this was also true of previous STARTs. But not only is the language in this preamble stronger, and not only has the Russian leadership said that any increase in our missile defense system would be considered a breach of the treaty, but Article V of the treaty specifically limits our ability to convert ICBM and submarine-launched ballistic missile launchers into defensive interceptors. The Post is completely silent about this fact.
New START Fails to Maintain Our Nuclear Forces: The Post does concede that our nuclear weapons our "in need of renewal, as are the laboratories and industrial complex that sustain it." But then they claim, "the Obama administration accepts this priority," which is odd since President Obama has promised not to develop any new nuclear weapons. The Obama administration is promising Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) $80 billion in spending on the "nuclear weapons complex" over the next decade, but no legislation has been produced. Any such promise would have to be passed by the House. Do you trust Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to spend $80 billion on nuclear weapons? Your answer to that question tells you all you need to know about the credibility of New START's nuclear modernization claims.
New START's Verification Procedures Are Inadequate: The Obama administration is telling skeptical Senators that "rejecting the treaty would leave the two countries dangerously uncertain about each other's arsenals." But New START's verification terms are so weak that they add little informational value. Paula A. DeSutter, the former U.S. assistant secretary of state for verification, compliance and implementation, noted in a Heritage lecture last month: "The Russians can do so much under this treaty to advance and expand their strategic forces… [yet] our ability to determine whether or not they are doing that and whether it violates the treaty is very, very low. The degree of verifiability is very low." Worse, the Obama administration admitted in Congressional testimony last week that they do not even care if the Russians cheat on the treaty.
All the pressure to blow past the critics, cut backroom deals and get the treaty ratified ought to raise huge red flags. New START has had less than half the number of hearings that treaties are normally subjected to, and the pace for approval certainly is trying to outpace any nuclear arms pact the Senate has ever considered. Not only is the speed with which it is being pushed through unprecedented, the administration continues to withhold key documents, including the treaty negotiating record. This is no time for conservatives in the Senate to offer lemming-like support for President Obama's arms control agenda.
Question 1
Question 2 In yesterday's New York Times, International Herald Tribune columnist Roger Cohen reported: "Since taking office, President Obama has reached out to the Muslim world as a whole, to China, to Turkey and to Iran, but has devoted scant serious diplomatic energy to Europe." Cohen then went on to quote prominent Paris-based defense analyst Camille Grand: "Europe is the object of benign U.S. neglect. Obama has not established or re-established a strategic relationship with any single European country or with Europe as a whole."
Question 3 According to the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released today, only 26 percent of voters think the economy is going to be better in the next year, and 61 percent think the country is on the wrong track. Desperate to show Americans he's fighting "every single day, every single hour, every single minute" to turn the economy around, President Barack Obama unveiled yet another economic stimulus spending plan yesterday. This time the President is promising to spend $50 billion over six years on a "Race to the Top"-style transportation pork plan that will fund pet leftist projects like high-speed rail. The President promised: "this will not only create jobs immediately, it’s also going to make our economy hum over the long haul."
Please leave this field empty
