Clinton Speaks Up for Treaty on Women

President Clinton on Tuesday called on the Senate to ratify a long-stalled U.N. treaty opposing discrimination against women, saying that failure to do so has been “an embarrassment” for the nation.

“There is no excuse for this situation to continue,” Clinton said in remarks timed to coincide with the observation of International Human Rights Day.

Although 154 nations have ratified the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the United States has taken no action on it since then-President Carter signed it in July 1980.

The last effort to bring the treaty to a ratification vote, in 1994, was thwarted by a series of Republican-led legislative maneuvers.

Clinton credited his wife with refocusing his attention on the treaty. In recent years, First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton has made improving human rights for women throughout the world one of her chief goals.

Clinton also is acutely aware that he owes his election victory largely to women. Republican challenger Bob Dole won among men in the popular vote.

By signing the treaty, nations agree to adjust their legal systems, if necessary, to ensure that women are protected against discrimination in jobs, in education and by individuals or organizations. U.S. laws now provide women with most of the protections specified in the treaty.

But conservative groups ardently oppose the treaty as too intrusive.

“It would be like an equal rights amendment enforced by the United Nations,” said Phyllis Schlafly, president of the conservative Eagle Forum lobbying group. “I don’t believe in giving any power over U.S. laws to a U.N. body.”

The treaty was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in December 1979. After Carter signed it, neither the Reagan nor the Bush administration sought Senate ratification. Secretary of State Warren Christopher revived the treaty by asking Congress to take it up during the first half of Clinton’s first term, when Democrats still controlled Congress.

It was approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, but Republicans blocked it from coming to a floor vote. No action has been taken since Republicans took control of Congress in 1994.

Clinton, in his White House remarks, said: “In our country--where we have worked so hard against domestic violence, where we have worked so hard to empower women--it is, to say the least, an embarrassment” that the United States has not ratified the treaty.

Nonetheless, supporters and opponents of the measure alike said that passage by the GOP-controlled Congress is not likely.

Given that the Senate lost moderate Republicans in the last election, there is even less of a chance that the treaty will be considered in the new Congress.

“It will be more difficult this time,” said a senior Democratic staff assistant for the Foreign Relations Committee. Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), the committee’s chairman, is known to oppose it.

Proponents argue that by keeping the treaty in limbo, the United States reduces its ability to pressure other nations to abide by international human rights standards.

Schlafly and other conservatives warned that accepting the treaty would be giving in to special interests.

“The fact that it’s pushed by Hillary Clinton and her kind of people shows it’s clearly a feminist push,” Schlafly said. “It’s probably promoted by all of her feminist pals.”