James M. Jeffords: “this is a day many of us have been waiting for for a long time. After having been thoroughly reviewed by the relevant…”

“this is a day many of us have been waiting for for a long time. After having been thoroughly reviewed by the relevant Senate committees, both in the last Congress and this one, the Chemical Weapons Convention has finally come to the Senate floor for debate and a vote. This is a complex and controversial treaty and I thank Senator Helms, Senator Biden, and others for their hard work on the resolution of ratification. The 28 conditions and provisions on which they have agreed go a long way toward protecting American interests and making this an even better treaty. While I have reservations about the remaining five provisions, I am pleased that the Senate will have the opportunity to openly discuss and debate these before moving to a final vote. I believe that when the facts come to light, those who are undecided will vote to ratify the treaty. I think I can safely say that no one in this body supports the production or use of chemical weapons, even as a deterrent. That is not what this debate is about. What it is about is what we get for what we give up. In other words, is the extra protection from chemical weapons that this treaty affords us worth the financial cost and the regulatory burden required to implement the treaty? Well, let's take a look. First, what do we get? Above all, we get enhanced national security. The treaty requires all signatories to do away with chemical weapons and to refrain from any future production.”