Tuesday, July 17, 2012

UPDATED: 34 Senators Oppose Law of the Sea Treaty

July 11, 2012

UPDATED: 34 Senators Oppose Law of the Sea Treaty

UPDATED 7/16/124 additional senators have joined in opposition to LOST, including Mike Johanns (R-NE)Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Rob Portman (R-OH) and Johnny Isakson (R-GA). With 34 senators against the misguided treaty, LOST will not be ratified by the Senate this year.
Strong opposition is rising in the U.S. Senate to the U.N.'s Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) that would subjugate American sovereignty to the whims of an international tribunal. To date, 30 Republican senators have signed onto a letter opposing LOST. It takes 67 votes to approve treaties in the Senate, so only 34 votes are needed to ensure defeat of this misguided treaty.
Why is LOST so harmful?
Below is the text of the letter and the current list of senators who have joined in opposition. Senator DeMint is still working to collect more signatures.
The Honorable Harry Reid
Majority Leader
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Leader,
            We understand that Chairman Kerry has renewed his efforts to pursue Senate ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.  We are writing to let you know that we believe this Convention reflects political, economic, and ideological assumptions which are inconsistent with American values and sovereignty.
            By its current terms, the Law of the Sea Convention encompasses economic and technology interests in the deep sea, redistribution of wealth from developed to undeveloped nations, freedom of navigation in the deep sea and exclusive economic zones which may impact maritime security, and environmental regulation over virtually all sources of pollution.
            To effect the treaty’s broad regime of governance, we are particularly concerned that United States sovereignty could be subjugated in many areas to a supranational government that is chartered by the United Nations under the 1982 Convention.  Further, we are troubled that compulsory dispute resolution could pertain to public and private activities including law enforcement, maritime security, business operations, and nonmilitary activities performed aboard military vessels.
            If this treaty comes to the floor, we will oppose its ratification.
Sincerely yours,
Jon Kyl
Jim Inhofe     
Roy Blunt      
Pat Roberts
David Vitter   
Ron Johnson
John Cornyn
Jim DeMint
Tom Coburn
John Boozman
Rand Paul
Jim Risch
Mike Lee
Jeff Sessions
Mike Crapo
Orrin Hatch
John Barrasso
Richard Shelby  
John Thune
Richard Burr
Saxby Chambliss
Dan Coats
John Hoeven
Roger Wicker
Marco Rubio
Jim Moran
Dean Heller
Pat Toomey
Chuck Grassley
Mitch McConnell

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

How many will vote yes on the small arms treaty at the united nations.

Anonymous said...

The beginning of regaining your sovereignty is to reject and say no to the contracts that bind you.

So many are in contracts of agreement and then argue about being oppressed.

Just like a religion that has an oppressive ritual for abusing it's members; membership in a political body that has a ritual of passing abusive laws is the same. The member of the religion stays because it's all they know, and the member of the political body stays because it's all they know but they point at the religion and try to discredit it.

The pot calling the kettle black.

There are those who have exited the system and the long arm of the system tries to affect them too. That's when it is obvious the free will of the people is being trampled upon.

When it is obvious the system is trampling the Free Will of free people, it has to change, or go away. Free Will rules.

But it had to have Free People for this to be known.

With so many 'citizens' the system thought it had them all.

A few brave Ones renounced that 'privilege' and went back to their 'rights'.

I'm reminded of that video with the check stops. The first thing they wanted to know is if the male was a US Citizen. If he was, they would have shown him what 'privileges' he had which is the privilege of pulling off the road (impeding his travels); but he reminded them he was 'free' and did not indicate any association with that which would oppress him.
The video does not give enough info on any steps he took on the contracts he'd created with them, including the voter registration contract, so I can't assume his written contract status except by the verbal contract he was making with those working for the system that wanted to qualify him as one they could oppress.

Anonymous said...

Look we know the whole thing is against the law. Participating in any way even against it gives it standing. In order for the senate to show obedience to their oath they should order the military to arrest those that brought this unlawful trash forward. If they don't do that their just playing with our heads. People it's up to us as individuals to regain our freedom. WE as individuals need to resist one on one. Forget organizing we already have the power, the right, the permission to return our nation to us the people. We have the second amendment and the Declaration of Independence. Be a army of one. RESIST the enforcers one on one and order givers will have no power. God helps those that help them selves.