Obama and his globalist comrades plan to use treaties as weapons against US sovereignty. On Monday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Senator John Kerry (D-MA), and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta took turns pitching the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) 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’s been 30 years since President Reagan first torpedoed the idea of a maritime bureaucracy, but that hasn’t stopped the “it takes a village” people from dredging up the policy from the muck.
It sounds innocent enough, but behind those benign talking points is a dangerous agenda that would undermine US sovereignty and siphon away billions 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, US 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 US Continental Shelf Task Force, those resources “may be worth billions, if not trillions, of dollars.”
Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), 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 US Treasury,” he wrote. What’s more, this “International Seabed Authority,” (ISA), would have the power to haul the US before global tribunals for perceived violations, order countries to share cutting-edge technologies, and bar the US Navy from using global waterways for defense or military purposes.
Moreover, 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 US government.”
Of course, most people recognized the bill was bad when Senator Kerry announced during yesterday’s hearing that he “would like to see this treaty stay out of the hurly-burly of presidential politics.” Translation? He plans on pushing this bill after November 6 so that Senators can’t be held accountable for passing such a controversial bill. Obviously, Senator 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 will be the favorite tactic of the Obama administration if given a second term: using treaties to get radical policies through the country’s backdoor.
This is exactly the kind of slippery slope that masks the destruction of American sovereignty and even domestic authority on everything from religious freedom, parental rights, property rights and even the right to bear arms.
***Ed Randazzo, is a nationally syndicated author. He has been a conservative activist and consultant for over 30 years and is currently the Chief News Editor of Life and Liberty Media***