The Family Research Council reports: (the bolding is my emphasis)
Rule number one of federal lawmaking: When a Senator says his colleagues would be "more comfortable" voting on a bill after an election, it spells trouble. And in the case of Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), that trouble is spelled LOST, or Law of the Sea Treaty. It's been 30 years since President Reagan first sank the idea of a maritime bureaucracy, but that hasn't stopped big government advocates from dredging up the policy every few years and selling it to Congress as buried treasure. Yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Sen. Kerry, and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta took turns pitching the 1982 treaty in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as a way to "bring order" to the world's oceans. The way they see it, LOST would help define the boundaries in international waters and create a "more peaceful" sea environment.
It sounds innocent enough, but behind those benign talking points is a dangerous agenda that would undermine U.S. security--and siphon away millions of dollars in the process. Lost in LOST's hearing were the facts. For one, proponents neglected to mention that the treaty would force America to release its hold on miles and miles of natural resources. Instead of profiting from the discoveries of oil or gas, U.S. companies would have to transfer those royalties to an international bureaucracy in charge of "redistributing" that wealth (sound familiar?) to needy nations. According to the U.S. Continental Shelf Task Force, those resources "may be worth billions, if not trillions, of dollars."
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), one of two dozen Republicans that oppose LOST, was emphatic about the threat. "[This] would be the first time in history that an international organization would possess a taxing authority, and it would amount to billions of American dollars being transferred out of the U.S. Treasury," he wrote. What's more, this "International Seabed Authority," or ISA, would have the power to haul the U.S. before global tribunals for perceived violations, order countries to share cutting-edge technologies, and bar the Navy from using global waterways for defense or military purposes. And if member nations decide to change the treaty? "There is no guarantee that the treaty will remain in the form that it is at the time of ratification. Under its terms, its content can later be changed by an amendment process that does not require the approval of the U.S. government."
Of course, most people recognized the bill was bad when Sen. Kerry announced during yesterday's hearing that he "would like to see this treaty stay out of the hurly-burly of presidential politics." Translation? I plan on pushing this bill after November 6 so that Senators can't be held accountable for passing such a controversial bill. Obviously, Sen Kerry and friends are hoping to follow the pattern of last year's START treaty, which is to wait until the lame-duck session to force unpopular and potentially unconstitutional policies on the American people.
Unfortunately for voters, this is a favorite tactic of the administration: using treaties to get radical policies through the country's backdoor. But, as FRC expert (and former ambassador to the U.N.) Ken Blackwell knows, this is exactly the kind of slippery slope that masks the destruction of American authority on everything from religious freedom to parental rights. What else could explain the Left's advocacy for the U.N.'s Convention on the Rights of the Child or the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women? They understand that once we dip our toe in the oceans, there will be no way to stem the tide.
- See also Frank Gaffney's commentary:
If, on the other hand, the members of the U.S. Senate trouble themselves to study, or at least read, the text of the Law of the Sea Treaty, they would immediately see it for what it really is: a diplomatic dinosaur, a throwback to a bygone era when U.N. negotiations were dominated by communists of the Soviet Union and their fellow travelers in the Third World.
This past weekend, I had the privilege of honoring a fellow Marine--FRC's own Doug Werk, who, along with his wife Shirley, has been a mainstay of this organization for more than 20 years. First as Vice President for Administration and later as Presidential Envoy, Doug anchored everything from the construction of FRC headquarters to the building of FRC's reputation as the premiere pro-family organization in Washington. On Saturday, we honored his decades of service at a special reception in Orange County. Without the Werks' passionate commitment to faith, family, and freedom, FRC would not be where it is today--among the strongest, most respected voices on Capitol Hill. Our deepest thanks to Doug and Shirley for inspiring generations of FRC staff to love God by fighting for America's best.
For Chen Guangcheng, it was a bittersweet trip to New York City. The blind pro-life activist, who escaped years of torture by Chinese authorities, is acutely aware of the family he leaves behind. His mother, brother, and nephew are still in China, their fate uncertain. But for today, the human rights attorney, his wife, and two children, will celebrate their first taste of freedom the Big Apple, where the family will make its home. "For the past seven years, I have never had a day's rest," Chen said. And he doesn't plan on taking one now--at least when it comes to his crusade against forced abortion and sterilizations. "We should link our arms and continue in the fight for the goodness in the world and to fight injustice," he told the press. Let's hope Chen's influence extends to his new home, where the inhumanity of abortion is so often ignored.
