On the recordDecember 20, 2010
What is the point of having the Senate involved if it cannot advise and consent and cannot amend the treaty, none of us on our side are arguing we should not have that right, that we do not have that right, that this is not a worthy debate, and that we should not debate a legitimate attempt to amend the treaty. In fact, if I thought it was a flawed treaty and if I thought there were enormous gaps in it, I would try to amend the treaty, I am sure. I think if that were true, we wouldn't have had a 60-to-30 vote against doing it yesterday. Sixty Senators made the judgment that we don't want to; we don't think it rises to that level. I would simply say to my colleague, it is not that the amendment-- that we shouldn't have the debate and that somehow not doing this now rejects the notion that we are capable of doing it; it is that we don't think it is a good amendment. We don't think the amendment rises to the level where it raises an issue that it merits sending the treaty back to the Russians.





