[Ct-nfb] {Disarmed} Senate rejects UN Treaty for Disabled Rights

Justin Salisbury PRESIDENT at alumni.ecu.edu
Sat Dec 8 22:24:42 UTC 2012


I am vastly confused by this post.  I'm not trying to debate it or make it look silly, but I need someone to please help me make sense of the content.

The number 38, which was the smaller number, would have been those who voted for the motion since the motion failed.  It's possible that 38 was also the number of republicans who voted against it was also 38, so that would leave 61-38=23 non-republicans who also voted no.  Is that right?

Also, what does the ADA have to do with abortion rights?

Justin

Justin M. Salisbury
B.A. in Mathematics
Class of 2012
East Carolina University
president at alumni.ecu.edu

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”    —MARGARET MEAD

________________________________________
From: Ct-nfb [ct-nfb-bounces at nfbnet.org] on behalf of Chris Kuell [ckuell at comcast.net]
Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2012 12:01 PM
To: NFBCT list
Subject: [Ct-nfb] {Disarmed} Senate rejects UN Treaty for Disabled Rights

Hello, List.

I received several emails on this and other NFB lists encouraging everyone to call their federal senators and urge them to vote yes on theConvention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. In short, this was an agreement among nations to assure the rights of people with disabilities, modeled on our Americans with Disabilities Act. Yet, the action failed. How did people vote?     And why would they oppose such a motion? The answer to the first question is that every democrat in the senate voted to pass the motion, while 38 republicans voted no. I really have no answer to the second question, although I now know how important rights for people with disabilities are to our current republican congressman.

Here is an article from 'The Hill'


A United Nations treaty to ban discrimination against people with disabilities went down to defeat in the Senate on Tuesday in a 61-38 vote.

The treaty, backed by President Obama and former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), fell five votes short of the two-thirds majority needed for confirmation as dozens of Senate Republicans objected that it would create new abortion rights and impede the ability of people to homeschool disabled children.

GA_googleFillSlot("GlobalAffairs_ContentSquare_300x250");
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) argued the treaty would infringe on U.S. sovereignty, an argument echoed by other opponents.

“This unelected bureaucratic body would pass recommendations that would be forced upon the United States if we were a signatory,” he said.

Supporters of the treaty argued that the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities would simply require the rest of the world to meet the standards that Americans already enjoy under the 1990 Americans With Disabilities Act.



The treaty was negotiated and first signed under former President George W. Bush and signed again by Obama in 2009. At least 153 other countries have signed it.

Republican Sens. Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), John Barrasso (Wyo.), Scott Brown (Mass.), Susan Collins (Maine), Dick Lugar (Ind.), John McCain (Ariz.), Olympia Snowe (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) voted with Democrats in favor of the treaty.

________________________________

More from The Hill:
♦ Boehner goes on PR blitz to counter Obama<http://thehill.com/homenews/house/270757-boehner-goes-on-a-pr-blitz-to-counter-obama>
♦ <http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/banking-financial-institutions/270809-warren-tapped-for-spot-on-senate-banking>



More information about the CT-NFB mailing list