Have you told your Senator to oppose LOST? The “Law of the Sea” Treaty?

The “Law of the Sea” Treaty (LOST) would, if ratified by the Senate, undermine U.S. sovereignty.  LOST is also called the “United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.”  It would give huge power over many spheres of America trade and security to the UN.

Pres. Reagan opposed it.  Pres. Obama wants it.  Think about that.

LOST

  • obliges the USA to give proprietary information and technology to our economic competitors and enemies without control over how it is used;
  • allows the UN governing body, the International Seabed Authority (ISA), a Kingston, Jamaica, to redistribute our wealth to the “developing world” in the form of “royalties”, additional taxes imposed on US companies;
  • would take away our sovereignty over our natural resources in our own waters;
  • would restrict the US Navy’s and commercial ships to navigate where needed;
  • would create a vast UN bureaucracy called the Enterprise to regulate and tax commerce on the high seas.

Below is a list of GOP Senators who have NOT opposed the Law of the Sea Treaty as of 26 May 2012. One way to contact your Senator with a pre-made message of opposition to this really bad treaty is to visit Tell-Your-Senator-To-Oppose-LOST.

GOP Senators Who Have Not Opposed the Treaty

Alexander, Lamar – (R – TN)Class II
455 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4944
Email Him! www.alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Email
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/senalexander

Ayotte, Kelly – (R – NH)Class III
144 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3324
Email Her! www.ayotte.senate.gov/?p=contact
Tweet Her! http://twitter.com/#!/kellyayotte

Brown, Scott P. – (R – MA)Class I
359 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4543
Email Him! www.scottbrown.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/emailscottbrown
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/ussenscottbrown

Cochran, Thad – (R – MS)Class II
113 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5054
Email Him! www.cochran.senate.gov/email.html
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/SenThadCochran

Collins, Susan M. – (R – ME)Class II
413 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2523
Email Her! http://www.collins.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/email
Tweet Her! http://twitter.com/#!/senatorcollins

Corker, Bob – (R – TN)Class I
185 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3344
Email Him! www.corker.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactMe
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/senbobcorker

Enzi, Michael B. – (R – WY)Class II
379A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3424
Email Him! http://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact?p=e-mail-senator-enzi
Not on Twitter

Graham, Lindsey – (R – SC)Class II
290 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5972
Email Him! http://lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.EmailSenatorGraham
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/grahamblog

Grassley, Chuck – (R – IA)Class III
135 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3744
Email Him! www.grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/CHUCKGRASSLEY

Hutchison, Kay Bailey – (R – TX)Class I
284 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5922
Email Her! www.hutchison.senate.gov/?p=email_kay
Tweet Her! http://twitter.com/#!/kaybaileyhutch

Isakson, Johnny – (R – GA)Class III
131 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3643
Email Him! www.isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfm
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/senatorisakson

Johanns, Mike – (R – NE)Class II
404 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4224
Email Him! www.johanns.senate.gov/public/?p=ContactSenatorJohanns
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/mike_johanns

Kirk, Mark – (R – IL)Class III
524 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2854
Email Him! www.kirk.senate.gov/?p=contact
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/SENATORKIRK

Lugar, Richard G. – (R – IN)Class I
306 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4814
Email Him! www.lugar.senate.gov/contact/
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/dicklugar
Tweet his Staff! http://twitter.com/#!/senatorlugar

McCain, John – (R – AZ)Class III
241 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2235
Email Him! www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact…
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/senjohnmccain

McConnell, Mitch – (R – KY)Class II
317 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2541
Email Him! www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=contact
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/mcconnellpress

Murkowski, Lisa – (R – AK)Class III
709 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6665
Email Her! www.murkowski.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Contact
Tweet Her! http://twitter.com/#!/lisamurkowski

Portman, Rob – (R – OH)Class III
338 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3353
Email Him! www.portman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact?p=contact…
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/robportman

Snowe, Olympia J. – (R – ME)Class I
154 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5344
Email Her! www.snowe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact?p=email
Tweet Her! http://twitter.com/#!/senatorsnowe

Toomey, Patrick J. – (R – PA)Class III
502 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4254
Email Him! www.toomey.senate.gov/?p=contact
Tweet Him! http://twitter.com/#!/sentoomey

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in The Drill, The future and our choices and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Have you told your Senator to oppose LOST? The “Law of the Sea” Treaty?

  1. GregH says:

    What does this have to do with the Catholic Church or moral law?

    [Not that I have to respond, but perhaps you have forgotten that this is not your blog.]

  2. disco says:

    It has to do with Fr Z’s frank commentary on life in general.

  3. Papabile says:

    @GregH

    Some time ago, maybe even a year, Father had a nice entry on how he was considering expanding what his blog spoke about, largely due to the fact that circumstances had changed. He mentioned he might keep the original name though.

    Perhaps, if you are interested in a blog that deals only with the Catholic Church or the Moral Law you should look at another blog.

  4. Bob B. says:

    I finally get it! Obama wants to transfer all functions of the US government over to the UN (and if you look at what the UN already does for “world peace”- abortion funding, contraception, etc, you immediately come to the conclusion he likes the way they think) and then he’ll get himself “elected” as Secretary General on the UN and he can move all his cabinet over with him, too.

  5. Matt R says:

    It doesn’t really change anything…much of it codifies what already exists in practice, and permanently codifies ideals the US fought for (freedom of the seas was Point 2 in the 14 Points of Woodrow Wilson). Joining the Convention will help us repudiate criticism of our refusal to recognize the ICC, since it shows the US adheres to international standards, and our non-membership in the ICC is an exception. Also, it will provide a means to go after countries in violation of international law (China, N Korea, and Iran are perpetual violators of the Law of the Sea). I believe it will aid us in securing maritime claims in the Arctic, since GWB neglected to negotiate areas of the ocean which were once covered by ice, and need negotiation because the claims overlap.
    Even FOX commentators support this…that should tell you something. [Perhaps the Obama supporters they also ask to comment.]

  6. Jon says:

    I don’t think Admiral Halsey will like this!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnWhBB-hdmk
    (1:20)

  7. mysticalrose says:

    Thanks for the heads up, Fr. Z. My Senator was on the list and I just sent an email!

  8. LOST…how appropriately named

  9. PostCatholic says:

    “…would create a vast UN bureaucracy called the Enterprise to regulate and tax commerce on the high seas.”

    I’m confused as to how US legislation would create a vast UN bureaucracy. Or any size UN bureaucracy, but practically speaking as one who has worked with the UN, there is no other type of bureaucracy there besides “vast.”

  10. pm125 says:

    Another little acronym to open much more than a gate for what?
    Email sent.

  11. onearmsteve says:

    Nice find, Fr Z. Nice job.
    Yeah the usual neo-con fake phoney deceptiCONS that usually are in the lists like this. Big gov’t hacks are people like Snowe, Brown, McCain, Graham, etc. Be nice if we could overturn/repeal the 17th amendment (the founders were smart enough not to have this as a popular vote since the House or Reps are already popular vote ergo have the states vote to balance things b/c a state wouldn’t put people like this in to eliminate the states … balance).

    No offense but emailing & calling them will not work. They do not care & you’ll get a nice little letter back saying blah blah blah on it. What IS needed is people with morals & virtues to start running for offices (at ALL levels). Currently we have immoral men/women in. Look for those that have virtue & morals & convince them to run or run yourself (I did 2 yrs ago but lost but will try again.. ran for house seat in state). We have a class of people that look down on the people they claim to represent. The royality class looks down at us serfs. Only way to fix it is getting involved in the process (I’m a fan of secession from this voluntary broken tyrannical gov’t {didn’t the Declaration say this? Call it re-declarations of independence} & going our seperate ways. Though to do this we need to clean up the state & local gov’t {those groups most people do not care about b/c tv makes it seem that DC is the most important place ever yet the founders would have said it was the least important that your state is your country}. A land mass this large ran by one little city on one side of a continent representing 1,000,000 for every 1 representative is not representative gov’t (750,000:1 currently but will be million:1) we are out of scale.)

  12. adeoamata says:

    My heart sunk for just one fraction of a second when I thought you might be referring to the only TV series I’ve watched in entirety… but then I realized you were actually talking about something serious and political. (I was imagining some congressional movement to land busted-up planes on mysterious moving islands and mandate that everyone believe in some kind of weak nondenominational heaven…) Okay. Just kidding.

  13. Virgil says:

    Perhaps you can comment on the Vatican’s views about the treaty? This would, in fact, keep the discussion in the realm of “Catholic Church and moral law.” :-)

    Granted, it’s just a white paper, but Rome has weighed in on the topic. . .

    http://www.nrccc.org/site/Topics/Issues/Oceans/Vatican_law-of-the-sea.PDF

    Without knowing the details of what’s in the treaty, I can’t tell. But it seems as if the Church, like Fox and Obama, is supporting the concept of the Law of the Sea.

  14. Andrew says:

    What does this have to do with quantum mechanics?

  15. acardnal says:

    Maybe “Lost in Space” is more appropriate here. “Danger, danger Will Robinson.”

  16. TZ says:

    I sent messages to my senators, both Democrats. (No doubt I’ll get a nice note from Klobuchar on what a privilege it is to listen to the people of Minnesota–or is that Franken? They use the same phrases in their form letters.) Forget the birth certificate and college transcript controversies–this sort of thing is proof enough the man isn’t American. Isn’t subverting sovereignty more properly called treason?

    Every time I turn around he’s up to no good.

  17. AGA says:

    The joint chiefs, the us chamber of commerce, the oil industry, etc… are all in favor of us ratifying this treaty.

    From what I understand the technology transfer provision has been eliminated.

    I’d bet that if the relevant Vatican entity does have a position it’s also in favor.

    Are we a member of the community of nations or are we the hegemon?

  18. AGA says:

    How is supporting this treaty a “neocon” issue, as onearmsteve states?

    My guess is someone like John Bolton would be against this treaty, as would Dick Chenney. So not sure how the treaty is neocon. Neocons are in favor of US hegemony, dominance, empire… This treaty makes policing the sea lanes a global, shared responsibility.

  19. AnAmericanMother says:

    Isakson used to be my representative, now my senator, still a mealy-mouthed linguine-spined RINO who thinks “collegiality” requires that he surrender regularly to the Demorats before they talk mean about him.
    He is worse than a nothing because he takes up a place that might be held by a man of courage and principles. Ugh.
    I Emailed him anyway, but he’ll just throw it in the electronic equivalent of File 86.

  20. Ingatius says:

    And when the UN does stupid things like making monsters like Robert Mugabe leaders of tourism, you know that it definitely cannot be trusted with any kind of real power or control in terms of US sovereignty. . .

  21. Giuseppe says:

    Even though the Successor of Peter, the fisherman, does carry some weight in matters maritime, I am not sure I can trust the Vatican paper — it’s in English.

  22. Sissy says:

    PostCatholic said: “I’m confused as to how US legislation would create a vast UN bureaucracy. ”

    The US legislation would be the Senate ratifying the treaty. It is the treaty that creates the vast UN bureaucracy. Further, the treaty transfers control over development of certain US seabed resources to the UN bureaucracy. In addition, groups that have been named as international terrorist organizations will be permitted to participate in the bureaucracy that will oversee this treaty. For these and many other sound reasons, Ronald Reagan was adamantly opposed to LOST. The provisions to which he objected have not been amended. As was noted above, the US already adheres to nearly all of the common law provisions in comity with other nations.

  23. PostCatholic says:

    So until the US ratifies the treaty, the vast bureaucracy will not be created? Or it has been created already, and this would make the US in some way subject to it?

    By the way, three UN staffers is all it takes to create a ‘vast UN bureaucracy’. I swear they can teach the Indians some new tricks.

  24. muckemdanno says:

    I don’t understand. There are only 20 senators listed as “not” on record as opposing this treaty. With 100 senators, that means 80 are on record as opposing this treaty, which means it’s DOA.

    One thing’s for sure…I’m not going to vote for anyone who supports or opposes this treaty!

  25. AnAmericanMother says:

    PostCatholic,
    It doesn’t matter so much whether the UN has already created a bureaucracy or not.
    What matters is that signing this treaty will make the United States subject to the corrupt pencil-pushers at the UN.
    This is a relinquishment of national sovereignty to a body that we know is (1) spectacularly corrupt; (2) incompetent; and (3) does not like the U.S. and is itching for the chance to ‘cut down the high poppies’.
    You can bet on people using the machinery to try to harm not only the U.S. but individual citizens.
    This is the same reason that the U.S. has withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the ICJ. People were using the court machinery as political theater, noisily seeking arrest warrants on various American officials for “crimes against humanity” and seeking to drag them off to the Hague.
    Not only would this sell the rope to our enemies to hang us – as Lenin observed – it would be giving it to them for free and standing on the trap door.

  26. trekkie4christ says:

    Situations like this make me realize that our current administration is almost entirely in the UN’s pocket. When did we cease to be our own nation?