I wonder if Congress and the American people realize that this week
Madeleine K. Albright, a loyal subject of “King” Clinton, officially
declared this administration to be above the law of commoners.

Specifically I’m talking about the Clinton administration’s arrogant
refusal to abide by the Senate’s rejection of the Comprehensive Nuclear
Test Ban Treaty last month.

On Monday Albright, echoing “King” Clinton’s earlier proclamation,
sent a letter to “select” foreign governments outlining the
administration’s plan to ignore the Senate’s decision to refuse the
treaty, saying they planned to abide by it anyway. So much for our
republic; easy come, easy go, right?

“In a letter to selected foreign officials, Albright said the Clinton
administration does not regard the Senate’s refusal to approve the
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty as the death of the pact, despite the
convincing vote against ratification,” the Washington Times reported
Tuesday. “The secretary’s letter was the administration’s formal
diplomatic notice that it will abide by the unratified test-ban treaty,
a position made clear by President Clinton a day after the Senate’s
historic treaty vote.”

“Despite this setback, I want to assure you that the United States
will continue to act in accordance with its obligations as a signatory
under international law,” said Albright in her letter. She pledged that
the administration “will seek reconsideration of the treaty at a later
date when conditions are better suited for ratification.” In other
words, she is saying, “To hell with what the Senate and the Constitution
say. ‘The king and I’ are going to ignore this lawful and proper treaty
vote because it didn’t turn out like we wanted it to.”

“We believe that so long as the president, in this case President
Clinton, expresses his intention to seek advice and consent pending
whatever time frame he chooses, customary international law applies,”
declared Albright’s mouthpiece, James Rubin. Translated, that means
that Clinton is only prepared to accept the “advice and consent
of the Senate only when it agrees with him, and until then this
administration will remain content to allow “international” law govern
this ostensibly sovereign country of ours.

It gets worse. “The king and I” don’t even want to accept the
reality that this treaty was indeed rejected by the Senate. To hear her
tell it, the Times said, “Mrs. Albright stated that the treaty was not

“Not defeated”? Has she completely lost her mind? In a vote of
51-48, the CTBT was definitely defeated — make no mistake about
it. But it obviously doesn’t matter to the Clinton administration.

Well, it didn’t take the Senate long to become indignant. Thank God
they’re mad as hell and aren’t going to take this any more, right?

“The president is not Louis XIV,” said one Republican Senate aide, in
response to the proclamations of “The king and I.” “He cannot declare
that he is the state. The Senate has made clear by its vote that the
United States intends not to be a party to the (test-ban) treaty.”

Curious response indeed.

Because it seems to me that is exactly what is happening.

What I want to know is what does the Senate — nay, the full
Congress — intend to do about it? They have a clear-cut, very public
example of this administration’s intent and desire to violate the exact
letter of the Constitution.

A Senate that permits this kind of arrogant disregard is complicit in
this crime against the Constitution. In essence, the president is
saying he is refusing to uphold, obey and protect the Constitution,
which grants to the Senate — and only the Senate — the right and
obligation to decide whether or not to accept a treaty. What is missing
here is the fact that a treaty, under the Constitution, becomes the “law
of the land,” and though the people — through their senators — have
rejected this new “law of the land,” Clinton is saying it will become
law anyway.

Pure and simple, he cannot do that and should not be allowed to do
it. To allow it is to invite further disregard of the Constitution not
only from officials and future presidents, but from the “governed”
populace as well. A nation of people who clearly see the government’s
own disregard for the laws of our land will surely have less respect for
them as well. It’s inevitable.

Clinton swore, as did Albright, to uphold the Constitution when he
took office. He is now breaking that oath, that contract, with the
American people.

The ball is in play and the lines have been drawn. Either this
Senate is for constitutional government or it is not — it’s just
that clear.

Government by monarchy featuring “The king and I” is not
American government. Senators: What’s your move?

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.