LOST Loses… 34 US Senators Oppose Law of the Sea Treaty

At least 34 senators will oppose Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) which means the treaty will not be ratified this year. The treaty would subjugate American sovereignty to the whims of an international tribunal – something that excites the progressive movement.

From the Jim DeMint website:

The Honorable Harry Reid
Majority Leader
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Mr. Leader,

We understand that Chairman Kerry has renewed his efforts to pursue Senate ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. We are writing to let you know that we believe this Convention reflects political, economic, and ideological assumptions which are inconsistent with American values and sovereignty.

By its current terms, the Law of the Sea Convention encompasses economic and technology interests in the deep sea, redistribution of wealth from developed to undeveloped nations, freedom of navigation in the deep sea and exclusive economic zones which may impact maritime security, and environmental regulation over virtually all sources of pollution.

To effect the treaty’s broad regime of governance, we are particularly concerned that United States sovereignty could be subjugated in many areas to a supranational government that is chartered by the United Nations under the 1982 Convention. Further, we are troubled that compulsory dispute resolution could pertain to public and private activities including law enforcement, maritime security, business operations, and nonmilitary activities performed aboard military vessels.

If this treaty comes to the floor, we will oppose its ratification.

Sincerely yours,

Jon Kyl
Jim Inhofe
Roy Blunt
Pat Roberts
David Vitter
Ron Johnson
John Cornyn
Jim DeMint
Tom Coburn
John Boozman
Rand Paul
Jim Risch
Mike Lee
Jeff Sessions
Mike Crapo
Orrin Hatch
John Barrasso
Richard Shelby
John Thune
Richard Burr
Saxby Chambliss
Dan Coats
John Hoeven
Roger Wicker
Marco Rubio
Jim Moran
Dean Heller
Pat Toomey
Chuck Grassley
Mitch McConnell

The four additional senators include: Mike Johanns (R-NE), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Rob Portman (R-OH) and Johnny Isakson (R-GA).

Heritage Action has more on the news.

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed,
Gateway Pundit

Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

  • Pingback: LOST Loses… 34 US Senators Oppose Law of the Sea Treaty|PolitifreakPolitifreak()

  • BNABarb

    Wonder why Sen Corker and Alexander are not on the list, not sure what is happening with the Senators from TN these days. I have sent emails to both and neither answered. Too bad I early voted today in the TN primary and couldn’t bring myself to vote for Corker.

  • scituate_tgr

    Senator Brown, Senator Scott Brown, please pick up the white courtesy phone.

  • Peregrine Took, Hobbit S.O.B.

    Thank you to each and every Senator on that list.

  • Adam

    Good news, now how about doing the same with regards to the small arms treaty.

  • Patty

    Thanks Jim.

  • bman

    is that Jim Moran or Jerry Moran from Kansas?

  • ar05075

    No surprise that Flimsey Grahamnesty isn’t listed.

  • TX Conservatives

    Kay Bailey Hutchison not on this list? Don’t expect one bit of conservative support in Texas ever again!

  • Jim

    This is good news, but how long will it be until King Obama issues some edict or diktat going around the Senate, effectively imposing LOST anyway?

    Usually I take the cries of ‘impeachment’ as hysterical rantings of the fringe, but King Obama and his open contempt and subversion of the Constitution has made me reconsider that stance.

  • luckyone

    It is notable that the RINO Kay Bailey Hutchinson’s name is missing. Hurry up November before she can do anymore damage.

  • Blacque Jacques Shellacque

    Looks like the Republicans as a group did something right for a change.

    Wonder why Sen Corker and Alexander are not on the list,…

    Does this answer your question? (it’s dated from six days ago, but it’s close enough)

  • Patty

    DCCC targets GOP lawmakers over healthcare vote in Web video

    Repealing Health Law Would Mean More Benefits for Members of Congress


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSIEK6UyK4Q AD HERE, AD HERE!!

  • Pingback: Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) sinks in Senate | Quite Normal()

  • Finncrisp

    Send this piece of crap treaty to Davy Jones locker. Many thanks to Sen. DeMint for getting this done. I’d like to see more confromity of opposition from this Senate; they are going to need it after the Fall of Barry. No more voting present, or staying on the sidelines. This isn’t that difficult.

  • Flintstone F.

    #12. Blaque

    Usual suspects.

  • BNABarb

    Thanks Blaque..I have also asked the TN senators about the Small Arms Treaty, I even said in my email just a yes or no on both with no explanation required, they couldn’t be bothered to respond.

  • observer

    now we ned to turn up the political heat to thes senators to defeat theUn’s tyranny under the small arms treatyto strip Americans of their gun, an action that is every lefty libs wet dream, and repeal the Second Amendment.

  • Redwine

    Kudos to these senators for protecting America from this NWO confiscation of our total right to our national sovereignty.

    I fear an EO and the usual anti-constitutional, anti-America trickery from Emperor Narcissus Hussein.

  • tennismom

    Agreeing w #10, Obummer will ignore the wishes of Congress & effect portions of the treaty by actions of regulatory agencies like NOAA or departments of DOD like the Coast Guard. I expect the same to happen w the unpopular, unpassable UN arms treaty.

    Impeachment is not enough for this guy.

  • JustSaying

    What is with Senator Scott Brown?????

  • Granny

    #10 July 16, 2012 at 3:02 pm
    Jim commented:

    This is good news, but how long will it be until King Obama issues some edict or diktat going around the Senate, effectively imposing LOST anyway?

    Usually I take the cries of ‘impeachment’ as hysterical rantings of the fringe, but King Obama and his open contempt and subversion of the Constitution has made me reconsider that stance.

    They already have – all over the news yesterday. The State of Alaska is suing over it.

  • Remco Kimber

    For those of you criticizing the absence of Scott Brown’s name from the list, you have learned a valuable lesson. Scott Brown ain’t no conservative. Look for his CFR membership in the coming years.

    Yes, he is a damn sight better than Fat Boy Kennedy ever was and is better than Coakley ever w/h/b. And will be better than Granny Warren who buys the full package of looney, moonbat leftist ideas.

    But don’t count on Brown when the chips are really down.

    A voter from Massachusetts,

  • Pingback: The Law of the Sea Treaty Will Not Be Ratified; 34 Senators Oppose | Liberty News Network()

  • bg


    yeah right, that’s what they’re saying now..

    get back to me when it’s a “done deal”..



  • Pingback: LOST Loses… 34 US Senators Oppose Law of the Sea Treaty | Liberal Whoppers()

  • Pingback: BREAKING: LOST Loses… 34 US Senators Oppose Law of the Sea Treaty and Boehner Slams Door On Carbon Taxes | askmarion()

  • RoadKill

    ANY elected American official who believes America should surrender it’s sovereignty to the United Nations by treaty or contract should be treated as a TRAITOR and removed swiftly.

  • bg


    LOST Treaty, UN Treaty, Gun Treaty Will Usurp
    American Liberty Unless We Fight Back



  • bg


    a bit more details..

    July 16, 2012

    Portman, Ayotte kill the Law of the Sea Treaty

    [Conservatives have long opposed the U.N. Convention on the Law of the
    Sea Treaty (LOST). The treaty would create a new global governance
    institution (known ominously as “The Authority”) that would regulate U.S.
    citizens and American businesses without being accountable to the
    American people or their elected leaders.


    Those final two votes came through this afternoon, when Sens. Rob
    Portman (R-Ohio) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) wrote to Senate Majority
    Leader Harry Reid declaring their intention to vote against the treaty.
    As one might expect from Portman and Ayotte, the letter delivers a
    studious examination of the costs and the benefits of ratification,
    and then concludes:

    “We are deeply concerned about the treaty’s breadth and ambiguity,
    the inadequate U.S. input in the treaty’s adjudicative bodies, and the
    automatic enforcement of tribunal judgments in the United States….
    No international organization owns the seas, and we are confident
    that our nation will continue to protect its navigational freedom, valid
    territorial claims, and other maritime rights. On balance, we believe
    the treaty’s litigation exposure and impositions on U.S. sovereignty
    outweigh its potential benefits. For that reason, we cannot support
    the Law of the Sea treaty and would oppose its ratification.”


  • When has congress stopped this imperial president from bypassing them and using excutive order ?…….Congress doesn’t matter ,contitution doesn’t matter ,laws doesn’t matter to this commie-n-chief, if he wants a law passed, he’ll find away around congress to do so….

  • Mad Hatter

    Thank you Senator DeMint for leading the charge against anti American bill.

  • Mad Hatter

    against this anti American bill**** typo


    Watch for Obama to try and get this pushed through one of the Departments. Keep a sharp eye out for it folks.

  • bg
  • AlwaysRight

    As had been mentioned already, I wonder what is happening with the two RINOs from Tennessee: corker and Alexander. They are pathetic. I sent Alexander an email a while back wanting to know why he was not defending the Constitution against this current Administration. No answer back. I will not vote for Corker in the primary. Can’t do it.

  • Peter Griffin

    “The treaty would subjugate American sovereignty to the whims of an international tribunal”. Wow, there is quite the elightening exchange of ignorance on this site! As a matter of fact accession to the treaty would grant the United States the only permanent seate (with veto power) on this big scary “UN tribunal” (the International Seabed Authority). As things presently stand we are in fact subject to the whims of the big scary tribunal, which can ammend the treaty however it wants and thereby change the international law that Americans must operate under. As things presently stand American oil companies refuse to drill on the extended continental shelf without our accession and are literally begging the Senate to ratify (drill baby drill??). You see, the treaty would expand American sovereignty over an area the size of the Louisiana Purchase by giving us territoriality over the continental shelf that extends beyond the present 200 mile limit. There are also huge supplies of rare earth minerals in the extended continental shelf that would allow American companies to cease relying on China for nearly 100 percent of their supply. Go read the comments by the CEOs of ExxonMobil, Shell, Verizon, and others. Go read the comments by Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue. Active military leadership also support ratification unanimously, but I won’t get into the security benefits. And I don’t know if this ever occurred to anyone on here but the United States could simply exit the treaty if conditions proved unfavorable. They won’t be unfavorable, though, because the entire treaty framework was put in place by the Reagan and Bush administrations. On how many international organizations does the United States have the only permanent veto? Russia left the 1994 negotiations because of the unbelievably advantageous position the United States was given. Those are some of the reasons why your hero Ronald Reagan supported ratification so long as his 4 or 5 objections were appropriately addressed (the organization went above and beyond addressing them in 1994 ammendments that were made purely because the United States demanded them). Those are also some of the reasons why both Bush administrations urged the Senate to ratify. Since you all are so enthusiastic about the treaty why not watch the hearings on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee website. I was at the hearings and the Republican opposition’s objections were time and again shown to be based on text that is either nowhere to be found in the treaty or was taken out with the 1994 ammendments. For example, the oft-cited concern that the United States will be subjected to the environmental laws of other countries is absolutely untrue. Parties to the treaty are only subject to “applicable” laws. Anyone who knows anything about International Law knows an obligation is not applicable to a sovereign state if that state has not voluntarily assumed it. That’s why Dick Lugar and other Republicans have compared their colleagues’ opposition to the Obama Administration’s opposition to the Keystone Pipleline (pointless objections that needlessly cost American jobs as they put it). You should really do yourselves a favor and watch the hearings. Knowing what you’re talking about is occassionally a good thing.

  • Peter Griffin

    Oh yea, that obnoxious comment about how this supposed subjugation “excites the progressive left”. Go look into who supports the treaty so you don’t make an ass of yourself in front of a bunch of people who don’t know enough to realize you’re making an ass of yourself. Nearly every significant conservative foreign policy figure of the past 50 years, going back to Henry Kissinger, says accession to the treaty is a no brainer. It was also an “urgent” priority for that great bastion of liberalism that is the George W. Bush administration. And look up what Ronald Reagan had to say about the treaty. And the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a dangerous socialist organization isn’t it? The oil companies and the military are all just branches of the progressive left aren’t they?

  • Alvin

    Hey Peter Griffin, if the LOST treaty is such a pet of the oil companies and the military then why is Senator John Kerry (D- MA) such a strong proponent of the treaty? Hmmmmm?
    This collusion between big business our government and the military is called the military industral complex. You just can’t see it.
    Most dems and many republicans are supporting this dangerous alliance.
    The ones who have indicated they will not support this power grab for the Iron Square (Iron Triangle + UN) are the real heroes of human rights all around the world.

  • James Schwarz


  • Pingback: Obama’s U.N. Treaty Defeated And Officially Dead In The Water (Law Of The Sea Treaty) Violates U.S. Constitution! « The Jeenyus Corner()