Us on International Fishing

A detailed Summary of Us on International Fishing

US action on International Fishing Disputes

While the United Nations has passed several resolutions and treaties regarding fisheries, the United States has typically refused to ratify such measurers. UNCLOS III, the most comprehensive attempt at a unified body of maritime law, has yet to be given the consent of the Senate. The sticking provisions of this treaty primarily deal with provisions for deep-sea mineral rights. Many US companies have already begun exploration in deep-sea minerals and the UN convention calls for deep-sea minerals to be the "common heritage of mankind". This, along with provisions for the required transfer of marine technology, have prompted Senator Helms (Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee) to oppose this treaty and effectively kill it.

While the US may reject certain provisions of UNCLOS III, they did rush to utilize the provisions of the 200 mile EEZ before the treaty was officially adopted. In 1976 Congress adopted a bill known as the Magnuson Act. This piece of legislation made full use of the concept of exclusive economic zones extending 200 miles to sea. The intent of the law was to bring fisheries within that area back into the exclusive domain of US fishermen. This piece of

Also, the members of the executive branch have to deal more directly with pressure from other global leaders. When other nations have a problem with US policy they do not approach the Senate first. In this regard the President is less insulated from the criticism of foreign officials, he is the figure head of the country and as such takes the first shots fired.

Senators, come from regions that are much more ideologically divergent than the country as a whole. This leads to a problem, while the national media may not particularly care if 100 lobster fishermen in Maine are upset, local news outlets often do. In this sense, any treaty that has an adverse effect on a small group of citizens is magnified at the state level. A group of 100 voting constituents means a lot in State-wide senate races, where in the national ring their influence is often diluted among the other millions of people who will more than likely not share such a localized concern. In this atmosphere, Senators are much more likely to oppose a bill that has a negative effect on any of their constituents than the executive branch.

There is another factor to be considered when dealing with the executive branch. The executive branch is often more vulnerable to political pressure from National interest groups and NGO's. When a President does not take into consideration the needs or desires of these groups he may have to contend with a full scale onslaught during the next election cycle. Even without the propoganda money controlled by these groups, many have constituencies or laborers in many states of the Union. If a group can exert suffici

Some common words found in the essay are:
UNCLOS III, Senate Senators, Relations Committee, NGO's President, Commander Chief, Magnuson Act, Fisheries Alliance, Executive Branch, United Nations, Senator Helms, executive branch, unclos iii, relations committee, senator helms, procedural rules, foreign relations committee, foreign relations, branch executive branch, deep-sea minerals, extremely difficult, branch executive, piece legislation, executive branch executive,

Approximate Word count = 1096
Approximate Pages = 4 (250 words per page double spaced)

Category: Politics