08 October 1999
(With passage now unlikely, Clinton joins call for delay) (560) By Ralph Dannheisser Washington File Congressional Correspondent Washington -- Leading Republican and Democratic senators are looking for a way to delay -- perhaps for more than a year -- the scheduled vote on ratifying the controversial Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty signed by President Clinton in 1996. With proponents and opponents in agreement that the treaty would surely fall short of the two-thirds majority needed for ratification if the Senate were to proceed October 12 or 13 as planned, Clinton himself joined the call for delay October 8. "The level of opposition to the treaty and the time it would take to craft the necessary safeguards to get the necessary votes are simply not there," the president said at a news conference in Ottawa, Canada. As Senate floor debate on the merits of the treaty proceeded October 8, however, it remained unclear how, and indeed whether, the impending vote could be called off. The vote was set by "unanimous consent" of the Senate. Opponents of the treaty, who are eager for a vote, say that such a unanimous consent action can be reversed only by unanimous consent -- and several of them say that they would object to pulling the treaty from consideration. Moreover Senate Majority (Republican) Leader Trent Lott, who by virtue of his position is the key player in scheduling Senate business, has flatly stated that the vote will proceed. But Democratic (Minority) Leader Tom Daschle told reporters that, if all efforts at negotiation fail, Democrats could employ a seldom-used parliamentary procedure to block Senate consideration of the treaty. That effort presumably would require only a simple majority -- 51 votes -- to succeed. Some of the senators seeking a delay say they would like to defer the issue until 2001, when it would be considered by a new president and a new Congress. Most Democrats support the treaty; many Republicans have announced their opposition. Chances for the pact to garner the necessary two-thirds majority at this time -- already slim -- declined further October 7 when Senator Richard Lugar announced his opposition to the treaty as drafted. The Indiana Republican, a leading arms control advocate, is widely respected among his fellow senators on such issues. Lugar said he does not believe that the CTBT "is of the same caliber as the arms control treaties that have come before the Senate in recent decades." He charged that the treaty "is flawed with an ineffective verification regime and a practically nonexistent enforcement process." The CBTB would result in a total ban on nuclear testing, by extending to underground explosions the existing prohibition on atmospheric testing. Supporters say the United States has adequate systems to check compliance with the treaty, as well as technology that makes further testing by this country unnecessary to the maintenance of an adequate nuclear deterrence. Opponents, now joined by Lugar, question those assurances. The treaty has been signed by the United States and 153 other nations. But it would not take effect until it was ratified by 44 countries with a nuclear capability, including the United States. Only 26 of those 44 have ratified. (The Washington File is a product of the U.S. State Department)