[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 25 (Wednesday, March 8, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1291-S1294]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                 CEDAW

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today is International Women's Day. To all 
you women out there, and men who care about women, happy International 
Women's Day.
  I think it is very fitting on International Women's Day to discuss a 
treaty this Senate should ratify, but has not ratified in over 20 
years. This treaty, signed by President Carter, almost made it to the 
Senate floor some 6 years ago when it was voted favorably out of the 
Foreign Relations Committee. Unfortunately, it was never brought up. 
The treaty is called CEDAW. It stands for the Convention on the 
Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women.
  This is a treaty that has been nicknamed the Magna Carta for women 
because it essentially gives basic human rights to women all over the 
world. That is why 165 nations, all of our allies and friends in the 
world, have in fact ratified it. But we haven't ratified it. One might 
say, well, who hasn't ratified it? I am sorry to say, we are standing 
with such stalwarts of democracy as Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and 
Somalia. We don't belong in that company. This country is, in fact, a 
leader of human rights. It is really an embarrassment that we have not 
brought that treaty to the Senate floor.
  I wrote a resolution that calls on the Senate to ask the Foreign 
Relations Committee to hold a hearing on CEDAW. It now has 25 
cosponsors, including Republicans. It is very simple. It expresses the 
sense of the Senate that the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign 
Relations--that is a committee on which I serve--should hold hearings, 
and the Senate should act on CEDAW, should take action on this 
convention to eliminate all forms of discrimination against women. The 
resolution goes through why this treaty is so important. It talks about 
how important it is that CEDAW be enacted: because it would help give 
women equal rights, equal opportunity, equal education; it would help 
them get protection against violence. We know that happens all over the 
world where women don't have equal rights. And it would give us the 
clout, if you will, the portfolio to be stronger as a world leader.
  The bottom line of this is that today I asked the Democratic 
leadership to ask unanimous consent to bring this resolution that I 
wrote to the floor. The resolution doesn't say ratify this convention. 
It simply says to the Foreign Relations Committee, please hold 
hearings.
  It was objected to by the other side of the aisle because they don't 
want to have this hearing. I will discuss that because it is with great 
respect that I bring up these differences between the two sides of the 
aisle. The chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, with whom I 
have a wonderful relationship, a very good working relationship, took 
to the floor of the Senate today. He unequivocally stated--and when he 
wants to be unequivocal, he can--that he will not hold hearings on the 
Convention to Eliminate all Forms of Discrimination Against Women. And 
he explained why. I totally respect his right to have this

[[Page S1292]]

view, but I will paraphrase the reasons he gave as to why he doesn't 
want to hold hearings on this. I will offer another view.
  First, he said he wasn't going to hold hearings because there are 
radical groups behind this treaty.
  I ask unanimous consent to print in the Record a list of the 
organizations that have endorsed the women's convention.
  There being no objection, the list was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

 Organizations That Have Endorsed the Women's Convention (Partial List)

     Action for Development
     *American Association of Retired Persons
     *American Association of University Women
     *American Bar Association
     American College of Nurse-Midwives
     American Council for the United Nations University
     American Federation of Teachers
     *American Friends Service Committee
     *American Jewish Committee
     *American Nurses Association
     American Veterans Committee
     Americans for Democratic Action, Inc.
     *Amnesty International USA
     Association for Women in Development
     Association for Women in Psychology
     Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith
     *Baha'is of the United States
     Black Women's Agenda
     *B'nai B'rith International
     Bread for the World
     *Business and Professional Women/USA
     BVM Network for Women's Issues
     Catholics for A Free Choice
     Center for Advancement of Public Policy
     Center for Policy Alternatives
     Center for Reproductive Law and Policy
     Center for Women's Global Leadership
     Center of Concern
     Chicago Catholic Women
     Church of the Brethren, Washington Office
     *Church Women United
     Coalition on Religion & Ecology
     Coalition for Women in International Development
     Columban Fathers' Justice & Peace Office
     Commission on the Advancement of Women/InterAction
     D.C. Statehood Solidarity Committee
     Earthcommunity Center
     Eighth Day Center for Justice
     Episcopal Church
     *Evangelical Lutheran Church of America
     *Feminist Majority Foundation
     Francois Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights
     Friends of the U.N.
     *Friends Committee on National Legislation
     *General Federation of Women's Clubs
     Global Commission to Fund the UN
     Gray Panthers
     Guatemala Human Rights Commission
     Hadassah, The Women's Zionist Organization of America
     Health & Development Policy Project
     Human Rights Advocates
     Human Rights Watch/Women's Rights Division
     The Humane Society
     International Center for Research on Women
     International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission
     International Human Rights Law Group
     International Women's Health Coalition
     International Women's Human Rights Law Clinic
     International Women Judges Foundation
     The J. Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human 
         Rights
     Jewish Council for Public Affairs
     *Jewish Women International
     Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc.
     Lawyers Committee for Human Rights
     *Leadership Conference of Women Religious
     *League of Women Voters of the United States
     Louisville Women-Church
     Maryknoll Mission Association of the Faithful
     Maryknoll Office of Global Concerns
     Massachusetts Women-Church
     Na'amat USA
     *National Association of Commissions for Women
     National Association of Social Workers
     National Association of Women Lawyers
     National Audubon Society
     National Coalition Against Domestic Violence
     National Coalition of American Nuns
     *National Council of Negro Women
     National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA
     National Council of Women of the USA
     *National Council of Women's Organizations
     *National Education Association
     National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council
     National Women's Conference Committee
     *NOW Legal Defense & Education Fund
     NETWORK--A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby
     Older Women's League
     Oxfam America
     Planned Parenthood Federation of America
     *Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Washington Office
     Psychologists for Social Responsibility
     Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Center for Human Rights
     San Francisco Bay Area Women's Ordination Conference
     *Sierra Club
     Sisterhood is Global Institute
     Sisters of St. Joseph of Peace
     Soka Gakkai International--USA
     Society for International Development/Women in Development
     *Soroptimist International of the Americas
     Union of American Hebrew Congregations
     *Unitarian Universalist Association, Washington Office
     Unitarian Universalist Service Committee
     United Church of Christ Office for Church and Society
     *United Methodist Church
     *United Nations Association of the United States of America
     United States Committee for UNICEF
     United States Committee for UNIFEM
     Washington Office on Africa
     Winrock International
     Woman's National Democratic Club
     Women Empowering Women of Indian Nations (WEWIN)
     Women of Reform Judaism
     Women for International Peace and Arbitration
     Women for Meaningful Summits
     Women Law and Development International
     *Women's Action for New Directions/Women Legislators Lobby
     Women's Environment and Development Organization
     Women's Institute for Freedom of The Press
     *Women's International League for Peace and Freedom
     Women's Legal Defense Fund
     Women's Ordination Conference
     World Citizen Foundation
     *World Federalist Association
     *YWCA of the U.S.A.

     *Active National Membership Organizations.

  Mrs. BOXER. With the Chair's indulgence, I will read to the Senate 
just a few of these organizations. I want the Senate to decide if these 
organizations are radical or in any way not in the mainstream of 
thought. These are just some of the organizations that say, yes, the 
United States should ratify this treaty to end all forms of 
discrimination against women: the American Association of Retired 
Persons; the American Association of University Women; the American 
Jewish Committee; Amnesty International USA; the Bahais of the United 
States; the Black Women's Agenda; the B'nai B'rith International; 
Business and Professional Women USA; Chicago Catholic Women; Church of 
the Brethren, Washington Office; Church Women United; Episcopal Church; 
the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America; Hadassah; Human Rights 
Watch; The Humane Society; Lawyers Committee for Human Rights; 
Leadership Conference of Women Religious; National Association of 
Commission for Women; National Coalition Against Domestic Violence; the 
National Coalition of American Nuns; the National Council of Churches 
of Christ in the USA; the National Council of Women's Organizations; 
the Presbyterian Church, Washington Office; the Soroptimist 
International of the Americas; the Union of American Hebrew 
Congregations; the Unitarian Universalist Association, Washington 
Office; the United Methodist Church; the Women's Legal Defense Fund; 
and the YWCA of the United States of America.
  I don't mind debating an issue on its merits, its demerits, its 
flaws, its problems. But to come to the Senate floor and say the people 
behind this convention to eliminate all forms of discrimination against 
women are radicals is simply not a fact in evidence, unless you think 
Hadassah is radical or the nuns are radical or all these churches and 
organizations are radical. They are far from radical. They are 
mainstream America. Mainstream America supports this, and we can't get 
a hearing because our chairman believes these groups are radical.
  I understand some tactics have been used to get the chairman's 
attention to hold this hearing that he does not appreciate. And that is 
his right. But I beg my chairman to look past that and understand that 
these groups are in the mainstream of America. America should be in the 
leadership and out front on this issue. So the first point he made, I 
do not agree with, that radicals are behind this treaty.
  Secondly, his other argument was that signing this international 
treaty would interfere with our sovereignty; in other words, it would 
interfere with us as lawmakers to do our job, would interfere with our 
laws. Nothing could be further from the truth. We have thousands of 
international treaties of which we are a part. They are all in this 
book. I won't put this in the Record because it would cost too much to 
print, but it is page after page with almost every civilized country. 
We

[[Page S1293]]

have treaties with them on all kinds of things--on science, on military 
aid, on human rights.
  I will give you a couple that we signed on human rights. We are a 
party to a number of human rights treaties. One in particular is the 
U.N. Convention Against Torture, and other cruel, inhumane, and 
degrading treatment or punishment. We ratified that in 1990. The 
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was ratified in 
1992. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial 
Discrimination, ratified in 1994.
  So to say that these treaties will interfere with us just doesn't 
make any sense. Again, it is just not a fact in evidence.
  The third reason my chairman says he doesn't want to hold a hearing 
is that he believes the whole purpose of this convention is to grant 
women the right to choose. In other words, in his opinion, this whole 
thing is about abortion rights. I want to say again how off the mark I 
think that suggestion is. When the committee voted this convention out 
for ratification 6 years ago, there was a big debate on this matter. 
What the committee did--by the way, I will support it overwhelmingly--
it said this treaty and this convention is abortion neutral. It 
specifically said it ``does not create or reflect an international 
right to abortion or sanction abortion as a means of family planning.'' 
It goes on, ``We don't endorse it as a means of family planning,'' et 
cetera. The understanding states that ``nothing in the convention 
reflects or creates a right to abortion'' and that ``in no case should 
abortion be promoted as a method of family planning.''
  So these issues that the chairman of the committee has raised, in my 
opinion, are straw men, or straw people, or straw women. They are not 
fact. The fact is, when we voted out this convention 6 years ago, we 
specifically stated it had nothing to do with abortion. The fact is 
that 165 nations have passed this, and we are standing with the most 
retrograde, rogue states in our opposition to it. There are thousands 
and thousands of treaties that do not interfere with our rights of 
sovereignty. The fact is that it has nothing to do with abortion. The 
most mainstream groups--and I have read some of them to you, and they 
are all that way--are behind this treaty and are working very hard to 
get it done.
  Now, 21 years ago, the U.N. General Assembly adopted a treaty. Twenty 
years ago, President Carter signed the treaty. So it is really long 
overdue. I don't want to stand with Iran, Sudan, Somalia, and North 
Korea, as the rare nations who have not ratified this. I think it is a 
disgrace that we are not a party to this treaty. We know since 1981, 
when it entered into force, it has had a positive impact on the 
countries that have signed it. One such example is constitutional 
reform in Brazil, which brought significant guarantees of women's human 
rights, and CEDAW provides the framework for articulating these rights.
  There are many other wonderful things that have happened worldwide as 
a result of this treaty. Other nations have copied word for word from 
the treaty the kinds of rights they are going to give women in their 
nations. We have an important book, ``Bringing Equality Home,'' which 
shows how many good things have happened because of that.
  You might say, Senator Boxer, why does America have to act if these 
good things are happening? The fact is, we have to act because we 
should be proud that all of the things in this treaty we already do in 
our country. So we should be a leader, not a follower, on this. And we 
need that portfolio because when there is a case of a country that is 
not doing right by its women--and let me give you a case in point. 
There was a case in Kuwait where women were struggling to get the right 
to vote. It was a big brouhaha, and everybody thought, my goodness, we 
came to their assistance in the gulf war, they are going to follow suit 
and women will get the right to vote. Guess what happened. They did 
not. We were pressing them so hard, but I bet they turned to our 
negotiator and said, ``Wait a minute, why should we listen to you, you 
aren't even a party to the CEDAW treaty.'' It takes away our ability to 
lead for equal rights for women because we have not yet ratified.

  I am very hopeful that Senator Helms will have a change of heart on 
this, although I believe he does hold strong views. But today I learned 
that Congressman Gilman, who is the Republican chair of the committee 
called the House International Relations Committee, has agreed to hold 
hearings on this treaty.
  The fact is, it is our business, our work, our job. We are the ones 
who should be doing it. Although I am very pleased that the House is 
going to have the hearing--and I hope I can get over there and testify. 
But I think we should have our own hearings. After all, we have 25 
Members of the Senate who were on this. I will read you the list of 
Senators who have gone on this, asking for hearings on this: Senators 
Murray, Mikulski, Collins, Snowe, Robb, Wellstone, Biden, Lautenberg, 
Kennedy, Sarbanes, Cleland, Bob Graham, Jack Reed, Lincoln, Feinstein, 
Landrieu, Feingold, Durbin, Daschle, Leahy, Dodd, Bingaman, Torricelli, 
Kerry, and Specter.
  We have many Republicans and many Democrats. I honestly think that if 
everyone knows about this resolution--and I will work hard on that--we 
will get some more. We now have a quarter of the Senate on record 
asking for hearings on CEDAW. My view is, since it was voted out 
favorably 6 years ago by the committee on a bipartisan vote of 13-5, we 
ought to do it again and get it moving and bring it down here for 
debate.
  Women deserve equal rights, voting rights, human rights. They deserve 
to be protected from violence, either in their own homes or walking 
down the street. They should be protected against institutional 
violence. We have seen things that go on in Africa with operations that 
are forced upon women. It is very important that for us to lead in the 
world, we must be a leader on this treaty.
  Again, I say to my friends on the other side who oppose this, I 
respect your right to oppose it. But, my goodness, what about having a 
hearing on it so we can listen to both sides? I think women in this 
country are waking up to this fact. There are so many issues we deal 
with every day. The women in my State are dealing with making it home 
in time to greet their children coming home from school or who are in 
day care. Their husbands are also working and putting dinner on the 
table and planning all the things they plan for their families. They 
are balancing their lives with their jobs. Do you know what? They care 
about this.
  I have had meetings with many women who care about this because we 
are on this Earth right now and we have to try to make it a better 
world. We can't stop every evil, that is for sure; we know that. But we 
can stand for equal rights and human rights for people all over the 
world. We can stand up and say in certain countries women are treated 
like second-class citizens and, in some cases, not even third-, fourth-
, or fifth-class citizens; they are treated like property. They have no 
respect. I just believe this great Nation of ours has come a long way 
to have the equality we have. Sometimes I look at the young women here 
and I think: Do you really know what it was like before women had 
equality?
  Do you know what it was like when I went to get a job on Wall Street 
after graduating from college and was told: Women don't work here? The 
most shocking thing about it was that I said OK. And I packed up my bag 
and left. I didn't even argue with them. It was a given. There were 
only certain jobs for women.
  I had to study to pass my test as a stockbroker on my own without the 
benefit of anyone. Once I got my licensing back, I said: Now, can I 
please be a stockbroker, and bring commission to this brokerage house, 
by the way? Well, all right, but just do it quietly. We want to make it 
look like you are a secretary. Those were tough days. It wasn't that 
long ago. I know I am old, but I am not that old. We faced that kind of 
discrimination.
  Women could not vote until 1920. People look around here and say: Why 
aren't there more women? Believe me. I say that every day. But the 
bottom line is we didn't get to vote until 1920. We weren't used to 
power--not even the power to vote until the 1920s. We are learning how 
to deal with it now. But it takes time. Why shouldn't the world learn 
from our experience? What

[[Page S1294]]

we know to be a fact and evident is that women are equal. By the way, 
it doesn't mean we are better. We are equal. We are equally good in 
some cases and equally bad in some cases--not better. But we know that 
and we respect that in this country, although I would still like to see 
the equal rights amendment be part of the Constitution. But basically 
we know that. We should take that knowledge and that commitment, and 
make sure the women of the world have a chance at life. I think we can 
do it through this treaty. I would think we would be proud to do it 
across the party line.
  I think this is going to become an issue in this election because 
there is no reason why we shouldn't at least hold a hearing and debate 
these issues.
  The chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee was down here today. 
He was eloquent in his opposition. Now I am on the floor and he is not 
here. I hope I have been a little eloquent on why we should pass the 
treaty. Why not bring that debate inside the Foreign Relations 
Committee where it belongs? Why not hear from Senators on both sides 
who care about this one way or the other? Why not vote it out? Why not 
come to the floor and have a good debate on these issues, and perhaps 
elevate the Senate? We get into our petty quarrels. Sometimes we take 
up issues that are, frankly, not as important as others. This one would 
be one that I think would make us all proud, wherever we come out on 
this matter and on this question. But in terms of the arguments against 
it, I hope I have put the other side out on the table.
  Good people are behind this treaty--good, mainstream American groups. 
The treaty is a Magna Carta for women. We ought to be proud of it. We 
ought to stand with the countries in the world that are civilized, that 
give their women equal rights and fair rights. We ought to stand with 
them. It is time we do it.
  It is International Women's Day. I will end where I started with 
happy International Women's Day. I hope when we think about this 
perhaps in the next few days and weeks and months, we will factor in a 
very important treaty--the Convention to Eliminate All Forms of 
Discrimination Against Women--on the floor of the Senate for a high-
level debate and a vote.
  Thank you very much Mr. President.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as if in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________