[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3731-3732]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   SENATE RESOLUTION 99--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE 
PRIMARY SAFEGUARD FOR THE WELL-BEING AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN IS THE 
    FAMILY, AND THAT THE PRIMARY SAFEGUARDS FOR THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF 
   CHILDREN IN THE UNITED STATES ARE THE CONSTITUTIONS OF THE UNITED 
      STATES AND THE SEVERAL STATES, AND THAT, BECAUSE THE USE OF 
    INTERNATIONAL TREATIES TO GOVERN POLICY IN THE UNITED STATES ON 
FAMILIES AND CHILDREN IS CONTRARY TO PRINCIPLES OF SELF-GOVERNMENT AND 
  FEDERALISM, AND THAT, BECAUSE THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE 
  RIGHTS OF THE CHILD UNDERMINES TRADITIONAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW IN THE 
UNITED STATES REGARDING PARENTS AND CHILDREN, THE PRESIDENT SHOULD NOT 
    TRANSMIT THE CONVENTION TO THE SENATE FOR ITS ADVICE AND CONSENT

  Mr. DeMINT (for himself, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Burr, Mr. Blunt, Mr. 
Boozman, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Ensign, 
Enzi, Mr. Graham, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Hatch, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Inhofe, 
Mr. Isakson, Mr. Johanns, Mr. Johnson of Wisconsin, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Lee, 
Mr. McCain, Mr. Moran, Mr. Paul, Mr. Risch, Mr. Rubio, Mr. Sessions, 
Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Wicker) submitted the following resolution; which 
was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

                               S. Res. 99

       Whereas the Senate affirms the commitment of the people and 
     the Government of the United States to the well-being, 
     protection, and advancement of children, and the protection 
     of the inalienable rights of all persons of all ages;
       Whereas the Constitution and laws of the United States and 
     those of the several States are the best guarantees against 
     mistreatment of children in this Nation;
       Whereas the Constitution, laws, and traditions of the 
     United States affirm the rights of parents to raise their 
     children and to impart their values and religious beliefs;
       Whereas the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the 
     Child, adopted at New York November 20, 1989, and entered 
     into force September 2, 1990, if ratified, would become a 
     part of the supreme law of the land, taking precedence over 
     all State laws and constitutions;
       Whereas the United States, and not the several States, 
     would be held responsible for compliance with this Convention 
     if ratified, and as a consequence, the United States would 
     create an incredible expansion of subject matter jurisdiction 
     over all matters concerning children, seriously undermining 
     the constitutional balance between the Federal Government and 
     the governments of the several States;
       Whereas Professor Geraldine Van Bueren, the author of the 
     principal textbook on the international rights of the child, 
     and a participant in the drafting of the Convention, has 
     described the ``best interest of the child standard'' in the 
     treaty as ``provid[ing] decision and policy makers with the 
     authority to substitute their own decisions for either the 
     child's or the parents'';
       Whereas the Scottish Government has issued a pamphlet to 
     children of that country explaining their rights under the 
     Convention, which declares that children have the right to 
     decide their own religion and that parents can only provide 
     advice;
       Whereas the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the 
     Child has repeatedly interpreted the Convention to ban common 
     disciplinary measures utilized by parents;
       Whereas the Government of the United Kingdom was found to 
     be in violation of the Convention by the United Nations 
     Committee on the Rights of the Child for allowing parents to 
     exercise a right to opt their children out of sex education 
     courses in the public schools without a prior government 
     review of the wishes of the child;
       Whereas the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the 
     Child has held that the Governments of Indonesia and Egypt 
     were out of compliance with the Convention because military 
     expenditures were given inappropriate priority over 
     children's programs;
       Whereas these and many other interpretations of the 
     Convention by those charged with its implementation and by 
     other authoritative supporters demonstrates that the 
     provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of 
     the Child are utterly contrary to the principles of law in 
     the United States and the inherent principles of freedom;
       Whereas the decisions and interpretations of the United 
     Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child would be 
     considered by the Committee to be binding and authoritative 
     upon the United States should the United States Government 
     ratify the Convention, such that the Convention poses a 
     threat to the sovereign rights of the United States and the 
     several States to make final determinations regarding 
     domestic law; and
       Whereas the proposition that the United States should be 
     governed by international legal standards in its domestic 
     policy is tantamount to proclaiming that the Congress of the 
     United States and the legislatures of the several States are 
     incompetent to draft domestic laws that are necessary for the 
     proper protection of children, an assertion that is not only 
     an affront to self-government but an inappropriate attack on 
     the capability of legislators in the United States: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that--
       (1) the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the 
     Child, adopted at New York November 20, 1989, and entered 
     into force September 2, 1990, is incompatible with the 
     Constitution, the laws, and the traditions of the United 
     States;
       (2) the Convention would undermine proper presumptions of 
     freedom and independence for families in the United States, 
     supplanting those principles with a presumption in favor of 
     governmental intervention without the necessity for proving 
     harm or wrong-doing;
       (3) the Convention would interfere with the principles of 
     sovereignty, independence, and self-government in the United 
     States that preclude the necessity or propriety of adopting 
     international law to govern domestic matters; and

[[Page 3732]]

       (4) the President should not transmit the Convention to the 
     Senate for its advice and consent.

                          ____________________