Senator Jesse Helms
Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
450 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Helms:

The office of Senator Craig Thomas has informed us that you -- or someone on your staff -- approved for ratification and submission to the Senate a major global environmental treaty, the "U.N. Convention to Combat Desertification" (UNCCD), on October 18. We wish to object in the strongest terms to the deceptive manner in which the treaty was brought to the floor and handled by your committee. Your office has facilitated the passage of a U.N. treaty that has made the pro-U.N. lobby ecstatic.

An expert on the UNCCD, Tom McDonnell of the American Sheep Industry Association, has informed us that he was never even given the courtesy of an opportunity to comment or testify on the bill. He says the American agriculture movement, which will be affected by the treaty, was ambushed. Henry Lamb, a director of Sovereignty International, has said that he, too, was kept in the dark. What's more, the office of Senator Thomas says that the Senator did not realize that the UNCCD was in the package of treaties that he was asked to introduce for ratification on the floor.

Would you explain to us why this happened and why supporters of sovereignty and American agriculture were denied an opportunity to comment on this development?

In an article posted on the Sovereignty International web site, it is noted that the ill-advised ratification of this U.N. treaty -- without review, comment, debate, or even a recorded vote - makes a mockery of the advise and consent responsibility placed upon the Senate by our Constitution. Further, it subjects the citizens of the United States to the increasing reach of global governance by the United Nations.

As you know, President Clinton had signed the treaty in 1994 and had sent it to the Senate in 1996. Now, suddenly, with no public debate on the Senate floor and no recorded vote, it's been ratified. Like Thomas, Senators who have been contacted about the treaty say they didn't realize what they were voting on!

Senator Helms, who on your staff engineered this deceptive maneuver on the Senate floor? What measures will now be taken to withdraw the U.S. from this dangerous document?

In the name of fighting the degradation of land, the treaty creates a U.N. committee with the power to supervise and influence land use decisions in 110 nations, including the United States. U.N. watchdog Henry Lamb, vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization, says this is one of several treaties that came out of the 1992 Earth Summit and were championed by then-Senator Albert Gore. Another, the Kyoto Protocol to the Climate Change Treaty, has been stalled in the Senate, even while Clinton tried to implement its provisions through a series of executive orders. Taken together, Henry Lamb says these treaties give the U.N. jurisdiction "over virtually all of the land and all of the resources" on the planet.

Senator Helms, we have since learned that your committee held what it called an "informal public hearing" on the treaty in July and recommended ratification with certain understandings. These include statements to the effect that the treaty would not dictate land use decisions by the U.S. and would not require more foreign aid spending. The committee also claims the treaty would not supersede the provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

That sounds great, except for the fact that all of this was done without the necessary public scrutiny, the treaty still carries the effect of law, and it appears the U.N. will not treat these "understandings" as legitimate.

I repeat: leading critics of the treaty did not realize what was being done. It appears none of them were invited to that "informal public hearing." On the other hand, radical environmental groups which are registered at the U.N. as NGOs, or non-governmental organizations, knew exactly what was happening. One of them hailed the Senate vote on October 18 and said that two liberal Senators, Russ Feingold of Minnesota and James Jeffords of Vermont, had "led the push" for passage. The "Coalition for the UNCCD" called the document a "major global environmental treaty." The NGOs involved in its passage included the Center for International Environmental Law and something called "One World Now."

It appears that the Senate Republicans gave Al Gore, the loser in the presidential contest, an early Christmas gift. You have saddled our new President George W. Bush with another U.N. treaty that harms America. Why?

Sincerely,

Cliff Kincaid,
President