It's not surprising that the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) would support the Law of the Sea Treaty. After all, the CFR has always believed that promoting world government is a good idea.

Follow this link to the original source: "Is the United States Ready to Approve the Law of the Sea Treaty?"

Back in the 1970s, the United Nations launched its plan for a global program of taxation. The objective was the transfer of wealth and technology from the developed world to the Third World, under the direction of the UN. A cornerstone of this international wealth transfer scheme was the so-called "Law of the Sea Treaty" (LOST).

LOST would give the UN power to tax businesses that wanted to develop the oceans' resources, which has been a long-time dream of the global government enthusiasts. LOST also would establish an international court system to enforce its provisions and rulings.

The treaty attempts to conceal the power to levy international taxes by labeling the taxes with such euphemisms as "assessments," "fees," "permits," "payments," or "contributions."

Under LOST, an "International Seabed Authority" would control the minerals and other resources of the oceans' seabed. After taking its own cut, this UN body would transfer whatever is left to select Third World governments and non-governmental organizations.

Fortunately, when LOST came before President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, he refused to sign the treaty. It appeared that the push toward global governance was halted, at least temporarily.

But that was not the end of LOST. Determined proponents of the treaty worked to "fix" its most objectionable parts, in hopes that the United States would then support it. The UN and its supporters know that, without the participation of the United States, their schemes will not succeed.

In the 1990s, LOST supporters sent the treaty to President Bill Clinton, who quickly signed the treaty and sent it to the Senate for ratification. Fortunately, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, then headed by Senator Jesse Helms, concluded that, despite cosmetic changes, LOST remained hopelessly flawed. Taking no action on the treaty, he sent it back to the president in 2000.

It appeared that LOST was finally dead. But it wasn't. Undeterred, LOST supporters in the State Department sent the treaty back to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2003. The Committee voted to send the treaty to the full Senate for ratification in February of 2004. LOST currently sits before the Senate, available at any time for a full Senate vote on ratification.

Let us hope that the Senate does the sensible thing and rejects LOST, along with any future UN encroachments on our sovereignty!