"I don't want to try to put our troops in all places at all times. I don't want to be the world's policeman." During the campaign, Bush promised to increase the defense budget, stating that "America's armed forces need better equipment, better training and better pay." However, Bush did not promise as much of an increase as Gore, even going as far as to state "If this is a race to see who can spend the most money, I'm going to lose." Analyst William D. Hartung of the World Policy Institute points out that Gore promised $100 billion over 10 years while Bush promised $50 billion over the same period. However, according to Hartung, "the $50 billion referred to specific projects", and "[i]t could not possibly have referred to their entire proposed increase". Bush, at the advice of Hadley, also proposed greater nuclear arms reductions than Gore. Hadley's plan proposed unilaterally reducing the number of proposed long-range nuclear missiles to around 1,500–2,000 from the then 6,500–7,500, but caveats to this included the abandonment of attempts to get the Senate to ratify the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the development of new low-yield bunker-busting mini-nukes for actual battle-field use. Hartung feared that these steps would "re-start the nuclear arms race" as the US arsenal was upgraded. At the advice of Rumsfeld's missile defense group, Bush committed himself to building a strong National Missile Defense (NMD). Stating that "[n]ow is not the time to defend outdated treaties but to defend the American people", he made it clear that he was willing to abandon the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in order to do this. A member of the group had told The Washington Post that "All of us to a greater or lesser extent were uncomfortable with the treaty, but Bush said 'My concern isn't the treaty. My concern is missile defense, and I don't want anything to stand in the way of it. Bush's plans for NMD went far beyond the limited options endorsed by the Clinton Administration. As Hartung points out, "Bush's advisers suggested that if elected, would not limit the system to land-based options, but would move full speed ahead to develop interceptors based at sea, lasers based on aircraft and perhaps lasers or rockets based in space as well." Hartung estimated that this would cost a minimum of $100–200 billion, far in excess of Bush's promised defense budget