There is a real and present danger to our sovereignty and drilling rights off the coast from the so-called Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST). At first, many of us suspected that this was a feeble effort on the part of a few special interests to resurrect a dinosaur treaty from the 80s that was never ratified by the US. However, there are a number of Republicans who have hinted that they are open to consideration of this onerous globalist treaty.
As we’ve noted before, among other things, LOST established a UN oversight board to divvy up all of the resources mined from the deep seabed and the extended continental shelf for the “common heritage of mankind.” The International Seabed Authority gets to decide how our revenues from seabed mining are redistributed to “developing” nations. Moreover, any complaint against the US brought by other member nations, which there undoubtedly would be many, must be decided by the UN authority. As we know, these countries do not exactly have our interests in mind.
Unfortunately, even Jon Kyl, who is a supposed opponent of the treaty, is showing signs that he is willing to play ball with supporters of the treaty. This, from The Hill:
Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), the Senate’s second-ranking Republican, said Congress should pass legislation codifying the parts of the Law of the Sea Treaty the United States is comfortable with, in essence separating “the wheat from the chaff.”[…]
“Congress could enact a statute that makes the navigational parts of the treaty, which codify the historical practice of seafaring nations, the law of the land,” Kyl told an American Enterprise Institute panel on sovereignty Monday evening, according to his prepared remarks.
“Then the Senate need not ratify the treaty, which still contains unacceptable provisions, including issues related to the exploitation of the seabed. A statute, in effect, can separate the wheat from the chaff. And the United States will contribute to the clarification of customary international law, by contributing its practices and legal opinions on the law of the sea.”
So here again we have Senator Kyl willing to pass parts of a bad treaty that are not necessary to sustain our security and prosperity in the first place. After all, if navigational rights are part of customary international law, then why do we need to sign onto a new treaty to affirm those rights? This will not end well.
We’ve seen this rodeo before with Jon Kyl attempting to “cleanse” a terrible treaty from the onerous provisions, but ultimately securing passage for Democrats. In 2010, Obama convinced the Senate to ratify the New START Treaty with Russia, an agreement that ostensibly committed us to unilaterally disarm and cut our nuclear weapons arsenal. In order to win the 67 requisite votes, Obama swindled several credulous Republicans into voting for the treaty on condition that he would commit to investing more than $4 billion into modernizing our nuclear weapons and facilities.
Well, it turns out that Obama lied. Obama’s proposed budget eliminates that funding. At the time, Kyl’s negotiation with Obama regarding weapons modernization helped secure the support of Republicans like Lamar Alexander. While Kyl personally voted against ratification of START, 13 Republicans supported it, granting Obama more than enough votes to ratify the treaty. We don’t need a repeat with LOST.
Republicans must stay away from LOST – completely. Is it really that hard to get 34 Republicans to protect our sovereignty?
Paid for by Madison Project. Not authorized by any candidate or committee.
© 2016 Madison Project. All rights reserved.
Site by A3K Advertising, Inc.