• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Historical Precedent: Treaties and Lame Duck Sessions

    As newly-elected members of the Senate pointed out in a letter to Majority Leader Reid: “no bilateral strategic arms reduction treaty with the Soviet Union or Russia has ever been ratified during a lame duck session.”  Let’s go further: Has any major bilateral U.S. treaty ever been ratified during a lame duck session?

    The 20th Amendment (ratified in 1933) established the current dates of Federal office terms, and consequently made possible the modern Congressional “lame duck” session.  Since 1933, there have been a total of eighteen lame duck sessions, including the current one.

    A study of every treaty ratified by the United States would, though desirable, take more time than is left in the lame duck session.  So we assembled a list of 34 significant United States treaties from 1933 to the present from multiple sources (including the State Department). [For the list of treaties examined, see our Webmemo: Treaty Ratification During Lame Duck Sessions.]

    We then cross-checked the Senate ratification dates with the specific dates of each lame duck session.  Our findings confirmed the assertion already made (that no bilateral strategic arms reduction treaty with the Soviet Union or Russia has ever been ratified during a lame duck session) and went much further.  Though some treaties may have been signed or entered into force during a lame duck session, we found no major treaty that has been ratified by the Senate during a lame-duck session.

    Important legislation has in fact been passed during lame duck sessions (such as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1994), but it must be emphasized that these were not treaties, but executive agreements.  While congressional approval is not required for executive agreements, treaties must be approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate. The requirement for a supermajority makes ratifying a treaty one of the most significant legislative acts a Senate can perform.

    The recent midterm elections have placed even more pressure on the passage of the New START treaty during the lame duck session.  The Administration will have much more trouble passing the treaty in the new Senate.  However, to force action on the treaty at this time ignores those elected to replace many of the Senators who would vote to pass New START.

    The ratification of New START by the lame duck Senate would not only ignore the message sent by American citizens in their election of new senators, but also defy the precedent set by American foreign affairs since 1933.

    Co-authored by Matthew Kuchem.

    Posted in First Principles [slideshow_deploy]

    6 Responses to Historical Precedent: Treaties and Lame Duck Sessions

    1. Pingback: Tweets that mention The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. -- Topsy.com

    2. Pingback: Historical Precedent: Treaties and Lame Duck Sessions (Comprehensive) | Just Piper

    3. Tim AZ says:

      Just another demonstration of the depravity that has saturated career politicians. Not just those that used to be known as the democrat party but, republicans that traded in their conservative principles for invitations to cocktail parties at our nations capitol as well as learning how to become wealthy during their stay in office at the peoples expense.

    4. Leon Lundquist, Dura says:

      The 111th Congress shall go down in History as the lamest, the worst, the least Representative Congress and biggest spending, most Communist, most Unconstitutional! Sure, they would love to give away our National Defense. They're Communists!

    5. Jonathan Cunningham says:

      When you said "we found no major treaty that has been ratified by the Senate during a lame-duck session," does that mean that you have found minor treaties that have been ratified? If so, what are they?

    6. guest says:

      The Marquis of Worcester, in a petition to parliament, in the reign of
      Charles II., offered to publish the hundred processes and machines,
      enumerated in his very curious "Centenary of Inventions," on condition
      that money should be granted to extricate him from the _difficulties in
      which he had involved himself by the prosecution of useful discoveries_.
      The petition does not appear to have been attended to! Many of these
      admirable inventions were lost. The _steam-engine_ and the _telegraph_,
      may be traced among them.
      From: Curiosities of Literature, Vol. 1 , Isaac D'Israeli, Project Gutenberg EBook #21615

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.