|
Roll Call 298.
Ratification (enactment) of a nuclear weapons reduction treaty limiting the number of warheads the U.S. and Russia could maintain in their nuclear arsenals to 1,550
Dec 22, 2010.
|
Y |
Y |
W |
|
Roll Call 297.
On an amendment that would have required the president to certify that he had negotiated a legally binding agreement stating that Russia would not use “covers” with respect to its nuclear warheads (“covers” literally conceal nuclear weapons and thus hinder weapons inspections). This amendment was offered to a resolution accompanying a nuclear weapons reduction treaty known as the “New START Treaty.”
Dec 21, 2010.
|
N |
N |
W |
|
Roll Call 296.
On an amendment that would have required the president to certify that he had negotiated a legally binding agreement stating that Russia would not deploy a significant number of nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missiles during the duration of a nuclear weapons reduction treaty. This amendment was offered to a resolution accompanying a nuclear weapons reduction treaty known as the “New START Treaty.”
Dec 21, 2010.
|
N |
N |
W |
|
Roll Call 295.
On an amendment that would have required the U.S. Senate to review rulings made by a commission established to resolve disputes (relating to a nuclear weapons reduction treaty) between Russia and the U.S. if those rulings “create new rights or obligations for the United States.” This amendment was offered to a resolution accompanying a nuclear weapons reduction treaty.
Dec 21, 2010.
|
N |
N |
W |
|
Roll Call 294.
On tabling (killing) an amendment that would have required the president to certify that Russia had returned all military equipment owned by the United States that was confiscated during the Russian invasion of the Republic of Georgia in August 2008. This amendment was offered to a resolution accompanying a nuclear weapons reduction treaty.
Dec 21, 2010.
|
Y |
Y |
W |
|
Roll Call 293.
On an amendment – to a nuclear weapons reduction treaty – that would have explicitly limited the capacity of Russia and the U.S. to maintain rail mobile launchers (which enable nuclear weapons to be launched from trains). This amendment would have had the effect of killing the treaty for the foreseeable future;any tampering with the treaty’s language would have torpedoed the agreement entirely.
Dec 21, 2010.
|
N |
N |
W |
|
Roll Call 292.
A nuclear weapons reduction treaty limiting the number of warheads the U.S. and Russia could maintain in their nuclear arsenals to 1,550 – On the motion to end debate on the treaty
Dec 21, 2010.
|
Y |
Y |
W |
|
Roll Call 287.
On an amendment that would have required the United States and Russia to begin negotiations on an agreement to limit the possession of tactical nuclear weapons. (“Tactical weapons” are short-range nuclear weapons designed to be used on the battlefield.) This amendment was offered to a nuclear weapons reduction treaty. The amendment would have had the effect of killing the treaty for the foreseeable future;any tampering with the treaty’s language would have torpedoed the agreement entirely.
Dec 20, 2010.
|
N |
N |
W |
|
Roll Call 286.
On an amendment that would have increased the number of nuclear delivery systems permitted under a nuclear weapons reduction treaty. (A “nuclear delivery system” refers to the technology that launches a nuclear weapon in a manner that will enable it to detonate on or near its target.) This amendment would have effectively killed the treaty for the foreseeable future.
Dec 20, 2010.
|
N |
N |
W |
|
Roll Call 285.
On an amendment (to a nuclear weapons reduction treaty) that would have required additional inspections of nuclear weapons facilities. This amendment would have effectively killed the treaty for the foreseeable future.
Dec 20, 2010.
|
N |
N |
W |
|
Roll Call 283.
On an amendment stating that there was a “greater need for transparency” with respect to U.S. and Russian tactical weapons systems. This amendment was offered to a nuclear weapons reduction treaty, and would have had the effect of killing it entirely for the foreseeable future. (“Tactical weapons” are short-range nuclear weapons designed to be used on the battlefield)
Dec 19, 2010.
|
N |
N |
W |
|
Roll Call 282.
On an amendment that would have eliminated language in a nuclear arms reduction treaty which some senators believed could harm U.S. efforts to build a missile defense system. This amendment would have effectively killed the treaty for the foreseeable future.
Dec 18, 2010.
|
N |
N |
W |
|
Roll Call 113.
A vote on passage of a Democratic amendment to the fiscal year 2005 Defense Authorization Act (S. 2400) to prohibit the Defense Department from using $36.6 million authorized in the bill for programs to study a new generation of nuclear weapons.
Jun 15, 2004.
|
Y |
Y |
L |
|
Roll Call 189.
S. 1050. Fiscal 2004 Defense Authorization/Vote to Table (Kill) an Amendment to Cut Funding for the Development of
"Low-Yield" Nuclear Weapons.
May 21, 2003.
|
N |
N |
L |
|
Roll Call 187.
S. 1050. Fiscal 2004 Defense Authorization/Vote to Allow the Development of "Low-Yield" Nuclear Weapons.
May 21, 2003.
|
N |
N |
L |
|
Roll Call 186.
S. 1050. Fiscal 2004 Defense Authorization/Vote to Table (Kill) an Amendment to Block Research Funding for the
Development of "Low-Yield" Nuclear Weapons.
May 20, 2003.
|
N |
N |
L |
![[POW!]](images/boxer_l2.gif)