OpinionEditorial
Editorial

U.N. disabilities treaty deserves ratification

EditorialsOpinionPoliticsTreatiesInternational Laws and TreatiesLaws and LegislationRepublican Party
U.N. disability treaty would not override parents' ability to make decisions about their own children
The U.N. disabilities treaty does not trump or alter U.S. laws or those of individual states

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities should not be controversial: It requires equal access for the disabled and bans discrimination against them in all countries that sign on. There is no question that the Senate should ratify it. The only issue is why it has any opponents at all.

Modeled after the landmark Americans With Disabilities Act, the treaty has been ratified by 146 countries and the European Union, and has legions of supporters in the United States — veterans groups of different generations, business and civic leaders. It also has bi-partisan roots: The George W. Bush administration participated in drafting it, and President Obama signed it. Although there are a number of Republicans who oppose it, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz) is an outspoken advocate, as is former Republican Sen. Majority Leader Bob Dole, who was disabled during his service in World War II. Now 91 and using a wheelchair, Dole recently made his second poignant trip to the Capitol to promote the treaty, urging former colleagues to vote for what he called "not a Republican or a Democrat treaty."

In late 2012, many did vote to ratify it — 61 senators, in fact. But treaties needs 67 votes, a two-thirds majority of the Senate. The treaty was opposed by 38 Republican senators, many of whom argued that it would undermine U.S. sovereignty and cede too much decision-making authority to the United Nations. Strong opposition also came from vocal advocates for home schooling who were alarmed by a passage in the treaty that they believe might override parents' ability to make decisions about their own disabled children. In fact, the treaty does nothing of the sort.

The bottom line is that the treaty does not trump or alter U.S. laws or those of individual states. And if there is any lingering doubt of that among skeptics, the treaty's backers in the Senate say they will add clarifying language as part of the ratification process to make sure there are no ambiguities. Senate ratification will bring U.S. influence and innovation to other countries that are in the process of expanding access and opportunity for the disabled. This treaty isn't about parents losing authority over their kids or the U.S. losing sovereignty over its citizens. It's about access for the disabled, and a world in which they can travel and thrive without facing discrimination. That's something we all should want. The Senate should finally ratify this treaty.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion

Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
EditorialsOpinionPoliticsTreatiesInternational Laws and TreatiesLaws and LegislationRepublican Party
  • California is lucky to have the unusual, unstoppable Jerry Brown
    California is lucky to have the unusual, unstoppable Jerry Brown

    I'll have what he's having.

  • Tech group tells Hollywood the sky isn't falling
    Tech group tells Hollywood the sky isn't falling

    Every few months, the entertainment industry and its allies put out another report for policymakers on the toll that the Internet and changing technology are taking on filmmakers, musicians, authors and the companies that finance many of their works. For example, it may be an estimate of the...

  • Going off the rails on Metro's rail cars
    Going off the rails on Metro's rail cars

    Two years ago, the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority became the first transit agency in the nation to pick a rail car manufacturer based in part on how many jobs the company would create. The Japanese firm Kinkisharyo International won the nearly $900-million contract to...

  • Pennsylvania's unconstitutional gesture to victims' rights
    Pennsylvania's unconstitutional gesture to victims' rights

    It's an occupational hazard for politicians: succumbing to the temptation to do something, anything, to get on the popular side of a public controversy, even if that means enacting an unconstitutional law. The latest example — one that we hope other states don't rush to...

  • Who'll run the Greek Theatre?
    Who'll run the Greek Theatre?

    For four decades, the Nederlander Organization has operated the Greek Theatre, a beloved music venue built in 1929 and owned by the city of Los Angeles. Now, a year before its current contract expires, Nederlander has partnered with AEG Live to compete against Live Nation Worldwide to win a...

  • Is Obama a modern-day Quintus Fabius Maximus?
    Is Obama a modern-day Quintus Fabius Maximus?

    President Obama has been repeatedly accused of delay. Critics say he dragged his feet on sending more troops to Afghanistan, on addressing the dangers in Libya, on providing support to Syria's rebels and, most recently, on initiating military action against Islamic State.

Comments
Loading