Stop abuse of Presidential Executive Power which seeks to ratify treaties without two-thirds approval of the U.S. Senate

The U.S. Constitution states in Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2, that, in reference to the President, “He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senate present concur;....”

In recent years, the President and the executive branch have entered into multiple agreements with other countries without a two-thirds approval by the U.S. Senate. Often this is under the guise of negotiating a “trade agreement” or an “executive agreement,” rather than a treaty.

A treaty, as defined by Merriam-Webster is “an official agreement that is made between two or more countries or groups.” According to the U.S. Department of State’s own website, in explaining the difference between a treaty and an executive agreement, it states, “...international agreements brought into force with respect to the United States on a Constitutional basis other than with the advice and consent of the Senate are ‘international agreements other than treaties’ and are often referred to as ‘executive agreements.’” In other words, in this self-contradictory statement, they seem to justify their own actions by wording it as a loophole. www.state.gov/s/l/treaty/faqs/70133.htm

Additionally, on the U.S. Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration website, on the definition of free trade agreements (FTAs), they explain that an FTA is “an agreement between two or more countries where the countries agree on certain obligations that affect trade in goods and services….”. Also, ‘.... the main goal of trade agreements is to … enhance the rule of law in the FTA partner country or countries.” 2016.export.gov/FTA/index.asp

This explanation certainly seems to meet the definition of a treaty.

Throughout the majority of this nation’s history, trade and tariff agreements with other countries were deemed no different than any other international “treaties.”

The early examples of the executive branch not respecting its boundaries date back to the introduction of the fast-track authority given to the President during Nixon’s administration. This procedural mechanism gave the executive branch the power to change the schedule by which trade agreements were voted on, to write lengthy legislation without review or amendments, to limit the debate on the agreements, and effectively to violate Congress’s constitutional authority to “determine trade policy?” Fast track authority was implemented in the passing of controversial trade pacts such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Asian-Pacific Trade Agreement and the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

As recently as the G20 summit, September 2016, there is suggestion that President Obama will announce that he and Chinese President Jinping will sign on to the Paris climate treaty. White House senior adviser Brian Deese said the president has the legal authority to do so without the ⅔ Senate approval because the pact is an ”executive agreement.”