The Russian Duma voted to ratify the New START treaty today, thereby ensuring that the treaty will enter into force. While this was more or less a forgone conclusion, START’s completion represents a significant achievement for the President. In fact, the past two years have seen remarkable progress on nuclear non-proliferation that has not simply moved the ball forward on non-proliferation but as Daryl Kimball of the Arms Control Association noted, “has put the United States back in the role of global nuclear risk-reduction leader.”

So what was accomplished?

Set the goal: Obama’s Prague speech in April of 09, which set the goal of the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons, essentially went there. He said what past leaders, with the exception of Reagan, had been reluctant to say: that nuclear weapons ultimately make the world a more dangerous place.

Reset and START: The US and Russia have more than 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons, therefore the White House effort to reset relations with Russia has been critical to paving the way for nuclear arms reductions. The successful negotiation and ratification of the New START treaty that verifiably lowers nuclear arsenals and nuclear delivery vehicles lays the groundwork for future cooperation.

The Nuclear Posture Review: While not going as far as some hoped, the NPR that came out last spring significantly moved the ball forward by reducing the role of nuclear weapons in our military posture.

Nuclear Security: The Administration organized for the first time a Nuclear Security Summit in Washington this past April to secure loose nuclear materials in Washington. The summit brought together the largest number of heads of state to the US since the creation of the United Nations and saw real commitments from countries to reduce vulnerable nuclear materials.

NPT Review Conference: In May, the Administration was able to forge a consensus agreement at the five-year Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, which stood in stark contrast to the acrimony that occurred five years ago during the Bush administration.

Nuclear stockpile: The Administration has allocated an enormous sum to fully modernize the nuclear stockpile, ensuring its reliability for decades and eliminating any possible need for new explosive testing.

Iran and North Korea: The administration was able to forge an international consensus at the UN to levy sanctions against Iran and North Korea. On Iran, it seems clear that sanctions have served to hinder Iran’s nuclear development.

The extent of the accomplishments lays the groundwork for future progress. Action can now begin on a new round of arms reduction talks with the Russians, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and further action on nuclear threat reduction and nuclear security programs. As the chairman of the international affairs committee in the Russian senate, Mikhail Margelov, remarked upon START’s passage:

The arms race is a thing of the past… The disarmament race is taking its place.

Some may point to the knock-down drag out fight in Congress over the START treaty as evidence that ratifying future treaties will be too hard to do. But this ignores the extent of the defeat suffered by the nuclear-right. The Administration was able to get the treaty through despite opposition from the leadership of Senate Republicans, every Republican Presidential candidate, the Tea Party and the Heritage foundation. How did that happen? Because opposition to START was nuts and the country knew it. Fights over future treaties will be similar, making them hard but doable.

Today, the House Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement will be holding a hearing entitled, “ICE Worksite Enforcement – Up to the Job?” Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) made the case that more worksite immigration enforcement is necessary in order to protect American workers — an argument which is undoubtedly at the crux of today’s hearing. “While more than 14 million Americans are struggling to find jobs, 7 million illegal workers remain in the U.S. workforce,” stated Smith. “U.S. citizens and legal immigrants should not have to compete with illegal workers for scarce jobs.”

However, while Republicans like Smith have repeatedly made the case that their immigration efforts are guided by a commitment to fighting for the American worker, their voting record on labor issues does not reflect that position in the least bit. America’s Voice recently released a report chronicling the votes of House Judiciary Republicans on several bills that were championed by labor unions and would have gone a long way in improving the lives of all working people. America’s Voice reports:

While House Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are now framing their long‐standing policy of expelling millions of immigrants from America as a jobs program, these ratings paint a dramatically different picture of their motivations. They have a long record of voting against the interests of American workers, and an equally long record voting for policies advocated by the anti‐immigrant lobby. [...]

Specifically, House Judiciary Committee Republicans opposed landmark legislation that would raise wages and improve the working conditions of U.S. workers multiple times. For example:

71% Voted Against Increasing the Minimum Wage

100% Voted Against Equal Pay for Women

100% Voted Against Wall Street Reform

100% Voted Against the Employee Free Choice Act

100% Voted Against Foreclosure Relief

94% Voted Against Providing Parental Leave for Federal Employees

The expansion of E-Verify — a federal electronic employment verification program — is one of Smith’s stated goals and will likely be at the center of today’s hearing. Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) proposed the system that eventually became E-Verify in 1995. He’s now chairman of the immigration subcommittee and will be overseeing the hearing.

On his website, Gallegly proclaims, “I am focused on the removal of illegal immigrants from the workforce and protecting American jobs for those with a legal right to work in the United States.” However, besides having a pretty abysmal voting record on workers’ issues himself, expanding his prized E-Verify pet project might actually hurt the people he claims to protect.

Last week, I wrote on a report released by the General Accountability Office (GAO) which found that though the program has significantly improved, it still contains some troubling problems including data inaccuracies, and fraud and employer misuse vulnerabilities. Other studies have shown that E-Verify has caused U.S. citizens to be mistakenly identified as undocumented workers while many of those who are ineligible to work may have fallen through the cracks. GAO went as far as to conclude that if E-Verify became mandatory in its current form, “more unscrupulous employers could have the opportunity to hire unauthorized workers without much risk of detection.”

While most of President Obama’s speech last night focused on domestic issues, he also briefly touched on foreign policy matters. At one point, the president said that “what sets us apart must not just be our power — it must be the purpose behind it.” He cited the recent US-backing of the referendum that created the nation of South Sudan, and also praised the recent revolution in Tunisia, where he said that “the will of the people proved more powerful than the writ of a dictator.” He concluded, “And tonight, let us be clear: the United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia, and supports the democratic aspirations of all people.” His declaration was met by standing applause by Congress:

OBAMA: Recent events have shown us that what sets us apart must not just be our power – it must be the purpose behind it. In South Sudan – with our assistance – the people were finally able to vote for independence after years of war. Thousands lined up before dawn. People danced in the streets. One man who lost four of his brothers at war summed up the scene around him: “This was a battlefield for most of my life. Now we want to be free.”

We saw that same desire to be free in Tunisia, where the will of the people proved more powerful than the writ of a dictator. And tonight, let us be clear: the United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia, and supports the democratic aspirations of all people.

Watch it:

Obama’s praise for the Tunisian revolution and declaration that the United States “supports the democratic aspirations of all people” is particularly relevant in the face of the massive pro-democracy protest movement that has erupted in Egypt over the past week, timed to coincide with the anniversary of Egyptian police revolting against their British colonizers. Hundreds of thousands of Egyptians have taken part in these protests, and the Egyptian government has responded with a heavy-handed crackdown, banning protests by the demonstrators and warning that anyone who marches against the government will be arrested.

One nation that has been mostly silent during these demonstrations is the United States. This is particularly important given that the United States is a close economic, political, and military ally to the Egyptian government, which receives nearly $2 billion annually in aid from the United States. Given these facts, the United States has leverage over the Egyptian government and could exert pressure that would help hasten a transition to a more democratic Egypt.

The one major statement that U.S. government officials have made about the situation from Egypt came from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. “Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people,” Clinton said. “We support the fundamental right of expression and assembly for all people and we urge that all parties exercise restraint and refrain from violence.” Former IAEA director and Egyptian human rights activist Mohamed El-Baradei responded to Clinton’s comments during an appearance on CNN International this morning. He said he was “stunned” by Clinton’s words and said that Egypt’s “basis” for stability was on “29 years of martial law.” He called on the U.S. to champion “democracy, human rights, basic freedoms, all the stuff the U.N. is standing for”:

ELBARADEI: I was stunned to hear Secretary Clinton saying that the Egyptian government is stable. And I asked myself, at what price stability? Is it on the basis of 29 years of martial law? Is it on the basis of 30 years of [inaudible] regime? Is it on the basis of rigged elections? That is not stability, that is living on borrowed time. Stability is when you have a government elected on a free and fair basis. We have seen how elections have been rigged in Egypt. We have seen how people have been tortured. And when you see today almost over a 100,000 young people getting desperate going to the street asking for basic freedom. I expected to hear from Secretary Clinton, stuff like democracy, human rights, basic freedoms, all the stuff the U.N. is standing for.

Watch it:

Given Obama’s praise of the Tunisian revolution and his promise to support “the democratic aspirations of all people,” it is likely that Egypt’s pro-democracy protesters are looking for the United States to practice what it preaches.