Why hasnt the us ratified the cedaw

They have disagreed, however, as to whether the Convention is an effective or appropriate means of achieving this goal. The making of multilateral treaties for the United States involves a series of steps that generally include 1 negotiation and conclusion; 2 signing by the President; 3 transmittal to the Senate by the President, which may include any proposed reservations, declarations, and understandings; 4 referral to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations; 5 committee consideration and report to the Senate recommending approval and a proposed resolution of ratification, which may include reservations, declarations, or understandings; 6 Senate approval of advice and consent to ratification by a two-thirds majority; 7 ratification by the President; 8 deposit of instrument of ratification; and 9 proclamation.

While the House of Representatives does not participate in the treaty-making process, both chambers must act if a treaty requires implementing legislation. The Obama Administration has expressed support for the Convention. On January 15, , Susan Rice, U.

Human Rights Council, the Administration reaffirmed its support for the Convention, stating that "the principles endorsed in CEDAW are consistent with our domestic and foreign policy objectives and are strongly supported in federal and state law. Reservations, Understandings, and Declarations that may Accompany U. Ratification of Multilateral Treaties. The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations may recommend that the Senate approve a treaty conditionally, granting its advice and consent subject to certain stipulations that the President must accept before proceeding to ratification.

The President may also propose RUDs at the time he transmits the treaty to the Senate or during the Senate's consideration of the treaty. Reservations are specific qualifications or stipulations that modify U. Understandings are interpretive statements that clarify or elaborate, rather than change, the provisions of an treaty.

They are generally deemed to be consistent with the obligations imposed by the treaty. Declarations are statements of purpose, policy, or position related to matters raised by the treaty in question but not altering or limiting any of its provisions.

President Carter signed the Convention on July 17, , and submitted it to the Senate for advice and consent on November 12 of the same year. The package included nine proposed reservations, understandings, and declarations RUDs to the Convention. See text box. The reservations recommended by the Clinton Administration addressed the following issues:. The three understandings submitted by the Clinton Administration stated that 1 the United States will fulfill its obligations under the Convention in a "manner consistent with its federal role," recognizing that issues such as education are the responsibility of state and local governments; 2 the United States will not accept Convention obligations that restrict freedom of speech or expression; and 3 the United States and other States Parties may decide the nature of the health and family planning services referred to in the Convention, and may determine whether they are "necessary" and "appropriate.

The Bush Administration stated that it supported the Convention's goal of eradicating discrimination against women on a global scale but had several concerns with the Convention. The Bush Administration further maintained that the vagueness of the CEDAW text opened the door for broad interpretation by international and domestic entities and that the RUDs proposed by the Clinton Administration did not address these interpretation issues. It also emphasized the importance of ensuring the Convention would not conflict with U.

The review began in mid-April On February 7, , the Administration transmitted a letter to the Senate stating that it did not support the Senate taking action on the Convention at that time. The committee held hearings in and but did not vote to recommend the Convention for advice and consent of the full Senate. The committee reported the Convention favorably with a vote of 13 to 5 in September , but the rd Congress adjourned before it could be brought to vote in the full Senate.

In June , the debate over U. On July 30, , the committee reported the Convention favorably by a vote of 12 to 7, subject to four reservations, five understandings, and two declarations. The first additional understanding included a proposal from Senator Jesse Helms, who was then the ranking minority Member, which stated that "nothing in this Convention shall be construed to reflect or create any right to abortion and in no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning.

Though it has no direct role in providing advice and consent to ratification of treaties, the House of Representatives has demonstrated a continued interest in CEDAW.

Similar House resolutions were introduced in the th through th Congresses. Some policy decisions and issues may continue to play a role in the debate if the Senate considers providing its advice and consent to ratification during the th Congress. For many policymakers, the question of U. Many critics, for example, have taken issue with the Committee's recommendations regarding abortion, Mother's Day, and prostitution.

During Senate debate in , for instance, proponents argued that the Convention would impose a "minimal burden" on the United States given that the Constitution and other existing federal and state laws already meet the obligations of the Convention. They maintain that the Committee relies primarily on individual countries to fulfill their obligations under the Convention and that it has no established rules for enforcing its recommendations or addressing treaty noncompliance.

A major point of contention among supporters and opponents of U. Opponents generally recognize that global discrimination against women is a problem that should be eliminated, but they do not view the Convention as an effective way to achieve this goal.

They emphasize that many countries widely believed to have poor women's rights records ratified the Convention. Some also contend that the Convention hurts rather than helps women struggling to achieve human rights internationally—arguing that CEDAW serves as a "facade for continuing atrocities" in countries that have ratified it.

Supporters of U. They contend that the Convention is a formal mechanism through which to draw attention to women's issues on both a national and international level, particularly in developing countries. The U. The study found that in Turkey CEDAW was cited in numerous court cases regarding discrimination against women; while in Nepal, the Ministry of Women and Social Welfare formed a taskforce to review all laws that were inconsistent with the Convention. Despite such progress, supporters have acknowledged that much work needs to be done to achieve full implementation of CEDAW.

In particular, the IWRP impact study identified several barriers to the Convention's implementation, including 1 the alienation of national governments from civil society, 2 lack of support from governments, 3 difficulty in implementing gender-integrated policies, and 4 lack of public awareness.

Both supporters and opponents of U. Similarly, Niger filed a reservation to a provision calling on States Parties to modify social and cultural patterns related to the conduct of men and women, while North Korea filed a reservation to a provision that calls on States Parties to modify or abolish existing laws that constitute discrimination against women. Many CEDAW proponents acknowledge the concerns regarding RUDs; however, they maintain that the benefits of the Convention's almost universal ratification outweighs the drawbacks of conditions imposed by some States Parties.

Examples of countries that have withdrawn reservations include the Bahamas, France, Germany, and Ireland. Supporters also maintain that the United States might be viewed as hypocritical because it expects countries to adhere to international standards that it does not itself follow.

Serving on the Committee, supporters argue, would provide the United States with an opportunity to share its expertise and experience in combating discrimination against women with other countries.

Critics contend that the United States is already an international leader in promoting and protecting women's rights and that CEDAW ratification would not affect its ability to advocate such issues internationally. In addition, many assert that CEDAW and, more broadly, other human rights treaties, are meant for countries with lesser human rights records than the United States. They further emphasize that improvements in the status of women in nations such as China and Sudan can be made only by the governments of these countries.

Article 5 a , for instance, calls on States Parties to take all appropriate measures. Such language has prompted critics to contend that CEDAW obligates governments, families, and individuals to adhere to a predetermined or artificial set of values, regardless of whether they align with national law, family traditions, or personal convictions.

Specifically, some argue that the Convention dismisses "established moral and ethical principles" that are based on human nature and experience, and discriminates against the "traditional" family and a "diversity of cultures and religious beliefs. CEDAW proponents counter that the Convention does not obligate States Parties to redefine or regulate gender roles or family structures.

They note that Article 5 calls on States Parties to take "all appropriate measures" [emphasis added], thereby leaving it to governments to determine what actions are appropriate based on their domestic laws and policies. Recommendation 19, for instance, relates "traditional attitudes by which women are regarded as subordinate to men or as having stereotyped roles" to "practices involving violence or coercion. Many opponents are particularly critical of the CEDAW Committee's recommendation to Belarus in that expressed concern regarding the "continuing prevalence of sex-role stereotypes and by the reintroduction of such symbols as a Mother's Day Proponents further emphasize that the Committee has reviewed the reports of many other countries that celebrate Mother's Day and made no similar comments.

A number of critics also contend that U. Countries that ratify the agreement are expected to work toward implementing the convention's provisions.

Every four years each nation must submit a report to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. A panel of 23 CEDAW board members reviews these reports and recommends areas requiring further action. When the United Nations was founded in , the cause of universal human rights was enshrined in its charter.

A year later, the body created the Commission on the Status of Women CSW to address women's issues and discrimination. In , the U. The CSW produced a Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, adopted in , but this agreement was only a statement of political intent rather than a binding treaty.

It took legal effect in after it had been ratified by 20 member states, faster than any previous convention in U. As of February , nearly all of the U. Ratification rates of are higher in democratic and communist countries, but lower in Islamic nations. However, CEDAW is also one of the most highly reserved: roughly one-third of the ratifications come with reservations.

Reservations are not necessarily restrictive to women's rights, and in some cases they seem to improve CEDAW's effectiveness, because the governments writing them are taking the CEDAW seriously. A year later, President Jimmy Carter signed the treaty and sent it to the Senate for ratification. But Carter, in the final year of his presidency, did not have the political leverage to get senators to act on the measure.

But North Carolina Sen. Jesse Helms, a leading conservative and longtime CEDAW opponent, used his seniority to block the measure from going to the full Senate. For example, studies by the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security and others show that women — and especially women of color — have suffered disproportionate impacts.

CEDAW can play an important role in helping to address the problems highlighted by the BLM and MeToo movements and to counter the devastating rollback caused by the pandemic. For example, a recent study authored by Rangita showed that from to , the percent of times that the CEDAW Committee mentioned minority rights in their concluding observations rose from just over 64 percent to 75 percent. Although there was a drop in the frequency of reference in and , this may be because in every concluding observation across all five years, the Committee mentioned intersectionality and gender-based violence percent of the time.

These critiques of the human rights agenda are frequently shortsighted as there are a number of tangible benefits to CEDAW ratification. First, ratifying the Convention gives American human rights organizations focused on ending discrimination against women an opportunity to bring their advocacy to the international stage.

This has proved an impossible obstacle to overcome in the US legislative body for the past four decades. Over the decades, the Foreign Relations Committee held hearings on the treaty in , , , and , but only when a Democrat held the chairmanship of the committee.

The committee even recommended twice, under the Clinton Administration in and under the Bush Administration in , that it be ratified. However, the full Senate never took the issue up, as the issue became more and more partisan in a political system increasingly polarized between Democrats, advocating for the ratification of CEDAW, and Republicans opposed.

And that despite the fact that a poll in , the last time formal hearings were held, found then 89 percent of respondents supporting CEDAW ratification. The main arguments brought forward against CEDAW ratification by the United States are largely reflective of the increasingly dogmatic and insurmountable political cultural divide between US conservatives and progressives.