The weapon is lowered into the earth before the last nuclear test in Nevada in September 1992.
testing—said he objects not just to testing but to the development of new weapons. “That was the whole purpose of a test ban in the first place—to prevent anyone from developing new nuclear weapons and weapons systems,” Truman said. He also said that scientist have set up monitoring systems that would detect any testing of smaller weapons by rogue nations.
New area code coming It’s not quite the same thing as getting a new U.S. House seat, but it signifies much the same thing—Nevada will get a new telephone area code in 2014. The entire state was once area code 702. By December 1998, the state had grown enough for two codes. Clark County—where most Nevadans live—kept 702 and the rest of the state became 775. At that time, Nevada was the fastest growing state in the nation. The state’s growth has now slowed down to a crawl, but it is still expected to grow enough to warrant a third code. The new code number, 725, will also be used in Clark County. However, residents of that metropolitan area will not be charged long distance rates for calls between the two codes.
Ratification
Confederate State of Nevada? The small group that is promoting Nevada’s secession from the union faces a few problems. About 9,000 people have signed a petition posted on a White House website calling for the feds to “peacefully grant the State of Nevada to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.” The language is the same as used on numerous other petitions for other states. One problem is that the petition speaks in the name of the state, which is on the record against secession. That record is another problem for secessionists. The Nevada Constitution says that “no power exists in the people of this or any other State of the Federal Union to dissolve their connection therewith or perform any act tending to impair[,] subvert, or resist the Supreme Authority of the government of the United States. The Constitution of the United States confers full power on the Federal Government to maintain and Perpetuate its existence [sic], and whensoever any portion of the States, or people thereof attempt to secede from the Federal Union, or forcibly resist the Execution of its laws, the Federal Government may, by warrant of the Constitution, employ armed force in compelling obedience to its Authority.” That state language is almost certainly trumped by the federal First Amendment, which guarantees both redress of grievances and freedom of expression, but it is an obstacle for secessionists. Then there’s the fact that there’s no evidence that Nevada public supports the notion. Nine thousand people is a third of a percentage point. Double it and it’s two thirds of a percentage point. One problem the Nevada secessionists don’t face is that it’s not a welfare state. Most of those petitioning for secession are from Republican states that are subsidized by the feds—that is, they get more back in taxes than they pay. In fact, letting them secede would help bring down the deficit and balance the budget. Dana Milbank of the Washington Post wrote last week: “It would be excellent financial news for those of us left behind if Obama were to grant a number of the rebel states their wish ‘to withdraw from the United States and create [their] own NEW government’ (the petitions emphasize ‘new’ by capitalizing it). Red states receive, on average, far more from the federal government in expenditures than they pay in taxes. The balance is the opposite in blue states. The secession petitions, therefore, give the opportunity to create what would be, in a fiscal sense, a far more perfect union. Among those states with large numbers of petitioners asking out: Louisiana (more than 28,000 signatures at midday Tuesday), which gets about $1.45 in federal largess for every $1 it pays in taxes; Alabama (more than 20,000 signatures), which takes $1.71 for every $1 it puts in; South Carolina (26,000), which takes $1.38 for its dollar; and Missouri (22,000), which takes $1.29 for its dollar.” Nevada receives less back than it pays to the federal government, though the available information—compiled by the Tax Foundation—is a bit stale, dating back to 2005. For more, see http://tinyurl.com/bt6g j7l. In 1941, there was a substantial effort to form a new state just northwest of Nevada, made up of Curry, Jackson, Josephine, and Klamath counties in Oregon and Del Norte, Modoc, and Siskiyou counties in California, to form a state called Jefferson. But that was not secession, just reconfiguration of existing states.
—Dennis Myers 6
|
RN&R
|
NOVEMBER 21, 2012
New WMDs Conservatives want new nuclear weapons, raising the spectre of new Nevada tests by
Dennis Myers
The results of the election have preserved the status quo on the defunct project to build a dump for high level nuclear wastes in Nevada’s Yucca Mountain. But another nuclear issue threatens to intrude in the Silver State—revival of nuclear testing. Conservative defense strategists say the U.S. needs to “update” its nuclear arsenal. They complain that under current policy, whether the U.S. develops a new generation of weapons depends not on U.S. security interests but on the actions of other nations.
“We have to worry about new bad actors, for example North Korea or Iran.” Michaela Bendikova Heritage Foundation On Dec. 8, the Nevada School of Medicine will offer free radiation screenings for Nevadans exposed to above-ground nuclear tests. Appointments must be scheduled. For information call 992-6887.
Though the U.S. Senate never approved the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the nation has been in effective compliance with it as a matter of policy. Congress ordered a nine-month halt to testing in Nevada or elsewhere, and that halt has been renewed by every president since then, actions that critics of the treaty say keep the U.S. from adjusting to changing times.
“This month marks the 20th anniversary of the last test of U.S. nuclear weaponry. … [W]e are left with Cold War nuclear weapons, based on 1970s designs, intended to deter the Soviet Union,” Michaela Bendikova of the Heritage Foundation wrote last month. “These legacy weapons have high yields and are designed to take down hardened silos or command centers. Some U.S. policymakers seem to have missed the memo: The Soviet Union is no longer the paramount threat. We have to worry about new bad actors, for example North Korea or Iran.” That last test was held on Sept. 23, 1992, and was code-named Divider. It was the last of an eighttest series. By then, 900 weapons had been detonated, most of them underground. “Once the moratorium [on testing] went into effect,” said Los Alamos physicist Gary Wall last month, “there were many high-level discussions about what kind of science program we would build to take care of the stockpile without testing—this ramped up very quickly once it was clear the moratorium was serious.” It is not necessary to test new weapons that are developed, but critics of the conservative effort believe pressure for testing would be intense. Preston Truman, a Utah leader among downwinders—people victimized by radiation from earlier
Meanwhile, President Obama’s stated determination to get the comprehensive test ban ratified by the Senate takes on new force with his reelection, but also complicates the worldwide nuclear picture. States that have not signed or ratified the treaty are China, Egypt, Iran, Israel, India, North Korea, Pakistan and United States. “Finally, the new team and the Democratic Party, which has retained control of the Senate, will be tempted to push through a slew of international agreements, including the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT),” wrote Center on International Cooperation strategic analyst W.P.S. Sidhu. “Were CTBT to be ratified, it would renew pressure on India to do the same. Similarly, the activist Obama administration is also likely to support negotiations for the Arms Trade Treaty and also revive efforts to stop the production of fissile material. Both of these will put India in a quandary, as it was relatively comfortable with the impasse in these areas.” In September, Obama official Rose Gottemoeller said, “The last U.S. explosive nuclear test is not the only anniversary happening this week. Sixteen years ago, this Monday, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) was opened for signature. The United States signed the Treaty that same day.” She said the Obama administration believes the refusal of the Senate to ratify the treaty was caused by doubts about verifiability, and believes those doubts can now be satisfied. “As I have already outlined with regard to our nuclear deterrent, our extensive surveillance methods and computational modeling developed under the Stockpile Stewardship Program over the last 15 years have allowed our nuclear experts to understand how nuclear weapons work and age even better than when nuclear explosive testing was conducted, as our national laboratory
