PPI - Radically Pragmatic
  • Donate
Skip to content
  • Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Locations
    • Careers
  • People
  • Projects
  • Our Work
  • Events
  • Donate

Our Work

Lame Duck Off to Bad START

  • November 19, 2010
  • Will Marshall

No sooner had Congress convened this week for a post-election, lame duck session than a partisan squabble erupted in the Senate that threatens to scuttle a major nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia.

The contretemps began when Jon Kyl, the Senate Republican Whip, said he doubted the Senate could take up ratification of the NEW START arms accord until next year. This may seem like an innocuous comment on scheduling, but delay could well spell death for the treaty. This year, President Obama needs eight GOP Senators to meet the 67-vote threshold for ratifying treaties; next year, he would need 14.

Kyl’s remarks were especially galling to treaty backers since he had earlier called New START “relatively benign” so long as the United States also takes steps to assure the reliability of its nuclear arsenal. Obama duly committed enormous sums to upgrade national weapons laboratories and modernize again nuclear warheads, including budgeting an additional $4 billion specifically to placate Kyl. In his statement, however, Kyl referred cryptically to “complex and unresolved issues” that still need to be worked out.

The administration nonetheless has said it will press for a vote this year. Failure to ratify the pact would be a major embarrassment for Obama, who promised the Russians the deal would be concluded this year. But even more, it would be a triumph of blind partisan animus over America’s national security interests, and our government’s to carry out a coherent and effective diplomacy with the rest of the world.

More is at stake than the rather modest arms reductions (under the treaty, both sides would cap their nuclear warheads at 1,550, down from the previous ceiling of 2,200). Senate rejection of the treaty could unravel the administration’s efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons to disruptive states, as well as its “reset” of relations with Russia, which it believes has begun to pay dividends on Afghanistan, Iran, and other important fronts.

It’s one thing for Washington partisans to squabble over domestic issues, like extending the Bush tax cuts. It’s quite another to let their fights spill over in the international arena, and undermine America’s ability to lead abroad. In the not-so-distant past – namely, the presidency of George H.W. Bush – arms accords passed the Senate on nearly unanimous votes. If Senate Republicans kill NEW START, it will be another dismal sign that our deeply polarized politics no longer stops at the water’s edge.

This piece is cross-posted at No Labels

Related Work

Op-Ed  |  February 16, 2026

Ainsley for The Mirror: Nigel Farage’s Reform are not the workers’ champions – look at their policies

  • Claire Ainsley
Op-Ed  |  February 13, 2026

Marshall for The Hill: The Midterms Aren’t Enough — Democrats Must Campaign for the White House

  • Will Marshall
Op-Ed  |  February 11, 2026

Ainsley for Fabian Society: The Democrats’ recent success across the Atlantic show that a dogged focus on affordability can defeat the right

  • Claire Ainsley
In the News  |  February 9, 2026

Ainsley in ABC Australia: UK political crisis deepens after PM’s chief of staff quits

  • Claire Ainsley
In the News  |  February 4, 2026

Marshall in Politico: ‘Comeback Kid’ no more: Dems aren’t protecting the Clintons from Epstein scrutiny

  • Will Marshall
In the News  |  February 2, 2026

Kahlenberg in The Chronicle for Higher Education: Does American Studies Have a Credibility Problem?

  • Richard D. Kahlenberg
  • Never miss an update:

  • Subscribe to our newsletter
PPI Logo
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Donate
  • Careers
  • © 2026 Progressive Policy Institute. All Rights Reserved.
  • |
  • Privacy Policy
  • |
  • Privacy Settings