And the horse they rode in on.
This part of the Senator’s “ongoing effort to protect
The U.S.-Cuba maritime boundary is the result of a 1977 agreement (described here, pdf) that was never ratified by the Senate. Every two years since, including during the current Administration, the
The Senator’s bill would nullify this agreement. Maybe there’s a lawyer out there who knows whether Congress can do this. One certainly wonders why the Senator doesn’t get the Senate to bring up the agreement for ratification, and vote it down.
Regardless, outside the legislative arena, the Senator is now asking President Bush not to make a new two-year commitment to the maritime boundary agreement. His staff was told that the note to that effect was sent but not yet received, according to an oil industry publication, and he asked the President to recall the note in a January 23 letter.
The Senator has good reason for concern. He notes that, “as the
But one can question the effectiveness of his approach. The Senate has shown no interest in his bill. The Bush Administration might think it reckless to abandon a fair, split-the-difference maritime boundary that governs fishing, energy, and any other economic activity. Absent the agreed boundary, there would be overlapping claims of 200-mile exclusive economic zones. That could have unpredictable results – Hugo Chavez and PDVSA, I hope you’re not listening – that might not benefit
If this were any country but
But this is