ARTICLE REVIEW: THE LOCALIZATION OF CEDAW IN THE UNITED STATES

 ARTICLE REVIEW: THE LOCALIZATION OF CEDAW IN THE UNITED STATES

It is no secret that the United States is the only country in the world to have signed, but not ratified the Convention on the Elimination of all Discrimination against Women. Whether this be due to the American track record of artificially assuaging the international community when it comes to human rights crises, but never following through in practice, or a genuine reconsideration, post-signing, of the faults of the document, is unclear. The fact remains that there currently exists only one international document that strictly addresses women’s rights, and the United States does not recognize it in theory nor in practice.

Treiterates that “President Jimmy Carter signed CEDAW in 1980. The Senate held hearings on CEDAW in 1988, 1990, 1994, 2002 and 2010, and twice reported favorably on it, but the treaty never reached the Senate floor for a vote” (Washington Post). Representing the Senate for BMUN’s 70th session, it is your duty to decide whether the ratification of CEDAW in the United States is favorable for your constituents and your political platform. Across the aisle, there will be and should be disagreement over the validity of such a document in the public sphere. Republicans might draw attention to the danger of CEDAW as an “abortion neutral” piece of international law, while Democrats may point towards the necessity for a public denouncement of gender inequality as necessary for true progress in the United States. 

The mentioned article reiterates that “President Jimmy Carter signed CEDAW in 1980. The Senate held hearings on CEDAW in 1988, 1990, 1994, 2002 and 2010, and twice reported favorably on it, but the treaty never reached the Senate floor for a vote” (Washington Post). Representing the Senate for BMUN’s 70th session, it is your duty to decide whether the ratification of CEDAW in the United States is favorable for your constituents and your political platform. Across the aisle, there will be and should be disagreement over the validity of such a document in the public sphere. Republicans might draw attention to the danger of CEDAW as an “abortion neutral” piece of international law, while Democrats may point towards the necessity for a public denouncement of gender inequality as necessary for true progress in the United States.

Alongside this, this committee, as a committee of Senators, must acknowledge the growing movement of local advocacy and politics. Whether it be in your character’s own district or in the party lines of the country as a whole, a response must be made towards the shift from federal supremacy in the US government to the power of local governments and local government officials. Without the burden of bureaucracy, local governments have oftentimes proven to be more effective in enacting real, tangible legislation for their constituents, rather than the Senator boxed in their lavish DC office.

    The article is linked here. Please take a look and consider asking yourself a series of questions once in character… How can the Senate maintain legislative supremacy over local governments when it comes to controversial issues like the ratification of CEDAW? How can governments at the local and federal level collaborate to ensure an effective response to the question of whether or not CEDAW should be ratified by the United States? And most importantly... is the ratification of CEDAW enough to address gender equality not only in the United States, but in the global community as a collective entity?