It's unrealistic to believe that our treaty with Russia is going to reduce proliferation with countries like Iran and Syria.

In my judgment, it would seem to me that the Russians need to be straightened out on this issue.

I believe that it is in our interest to do so whether or not we have a treaty, that the administration is committed to do so, and I hope that the Congress will follow the budget proposals of the administration and move forward with the…

The New START Treaty simply does not limit the number of launches the United States can deploy or otherwise constrain the ability of the United States to deploy effective ballistic missile defense, period, full stop.

Well, do you share my concern about this?

Can the United States credibly take on increased commitments to provide assured deterrence to our allies and extended deterrence with a shrinking arsenal of launchers?

I think that there are at least some on the Russian side that would like to use the discussion of the treaty to attempt to constrain our options on missile defense.

We must recognize that the danger of a strategic nuclear conflict with Russia is negligible.

To me, nobody can argue that we really need a treaty in order to have an inspection regime.

Any arms treaty that goes into effect should focus on nuclear weapons reduction, and not on missile defense limitations.

I have advised Ms. LaFleur she is going to learn a lot more about anadromous fish than she wants to hear about on FERC.

The President certainly has appointed a diverse pair, one from the Northeast and one from the Northwest.