This essay traces the link between partisan polarization and ratification of human rights treaties by the US Senate. Therefore, it compares similar designed treaties to investigate the role of partisan cleavages on human rights issues.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
1.1 State of the Art and Hypothesis Generation
2. Methodical Approach
2.1 Case Selection
3. Case Study Analysis
3.1 The Convention against Torture
3.2 The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
4. Conclusion
5. Literature
6. Appendix
Objectives & Research Focus
This study investigates the influence of partisan polarization on the ratification of international human rights treaties by the U.S. Senate. It seeks to understand why, despite claims of prioritizing human rights, the United States has faced difficulties in ratifying several major international conventions, positing that institutional hurdles and ideological divisions within the political system create an unfavorable environment for such processes.
- Analysis of the relationship between partisan polarization and legislative success.
- Examination of institutional constraints within the U.S. Senate, such as the two-thirds majority requirement.
- Comparative case study of the Convention against Torture (CAT) and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
- Evaluation of the role of "reservations" as a mechanism to build consensus.
- Assessment of how shifting political environments impact the "winset" for international agreements.
Excerpt from the Book
1. Introduction
The present essay investigates the role of the US Senate in international human rights policy. The USA is accused by the civil society as well as from social scientists to follow a hypocritical approach of human rights policy. While claiming universal human rights as driving force behind foreign policy, the US did not succeed in ratifying some of the landmark human rights conventions, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention to Eliminate Discrimination against Women and nowadays the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to name a few. The reasons might be related with the general reluctance of international norms undermining the US constitutions superior civil and political rights. However, this explanation is not satisfactory as alleged hypocrisy does not provide a sufficient analysis of the specific reasons for ratification behavior. Accordingly, the author of this paper suggests to consider institutional hurdles of the decentralized system of the USA and the steady rise of partisan polarization.
Polarization is defined as the ideological divide between the parties. Thus, the greater the sum of ideological differences between individual members of the parties in congress, the greater is the partisan polarization. It follows that consensus in congress is more difficult to achieve under greater polarization due to bicameralism and the prevailing status of divided government leading to less public policy production.
Thus, the following research question will be examined: How does polarization matter in human rights treaty ratification by the US Senate?
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the research problem regarding U.S. human rights policy and the hypothesis that partisan polarization and institutional complexity are major barriers to treaty ratification.
1.1 State of the Art and Hypothesis Generation: Reviews existing theories on ratification, emphasizing the role of reservations and the impact of the U.S. political system, leading to the hypothesis that lower polarization is a necessary condition for successful treaty ratification.
2. Methodical Approach: Details the comparative case study methodology using the Comparative Manifesto Project to track polarization and the THOMAS-Database for content analysis of Senate debates.
2.1 Case Selection: Explains the choice of comparing the ratified Convention against Torture with the rejected Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to assess different polarization contexts.
3. Case Study Analysis: Investigates the specific political conditions and legislative dynamics surrounding the ratification of the two chosen conventions.
3.1 The Convention against Torture: Analyzes the successful ratification in 1990, highlighting how moderate polarization and the use of reservations allowed for a bipartisan consensus.
3.2 The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Discusses the 2012 rejection, illustrating how extreme polarization and ideological conflict regarding sovereignty hindered the ratification process.
4. Conclusion: Synthesizes the findings, confirming that increased polarization shrinks the consensus-building space (winset) and emphasizes that low polarization remains essential for treaty success.
5. Literature: Lists the academic sources and primary documents used for the analysis.
6. Appendix: Provides a comprehensive overview of the status of human rights treaty ratifications by the United States.
Keywords
U.S. Senate, Human Rights Treaties, Partisan Polarization, Treaty Ratification, Institutional Hurdles, Convention against Torture, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Foreign Policy, Sovereignty, Political Gridlock, Bipartisan Consensus, International Law, U.S. Constitution, Legislative Coalitions, Multilateralism.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this research?
The research examines the impact of partisan polarization on the ability of the U.S. Senate to ratify international human rights treaties.
What are the primary themes discussed?
The central themes include institutional constraints, the role of political ideology, the use of legal reservations, and the tension between national sovereignty and international commitments.
What is the core research question?
The study specifically asks: How does polarization matter in human rights treaty ratification by the US Senate?
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author uses a comparative case study approach, utilizing the Comparative Manifesto Project for data and analyzing congressional records and legislative debates.
What is covered in the main section of the paper?
The main section provides an analysis of the ratification processes for the Convention against Torture and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, comparing their legislative outcomes against the backdrop of changing political polarization levels.
Which keywords best describe the document?
Key terms include Partisan Polarization, Treaty Ratification, U.S. Senate, Human Rights, Sovereignty, and Legislative Gridlock.
Why was the Convention against Torture considered a success in the study?
The study argues it was successful because it occurred during a period of moderate polarization, where both parties could agree on necessary reservations that protected U.S. sovereignty.
Why did the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities fail in 2012?
It failed primarily due to extreme partisan polarization, where a conservative minority successfully blocked ratification by framing the treaty as an infringement on national sovereignty and domestic policy.
Does the author believe a unified government guarantees treaty ratification?
No, the author concludes that even under a unified government, the requirement for a two-thirds majority in the Senate makes bipartisan consensus necessary, and high polarization prevents this.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Julian Ostendorf (Autor:in), 2014, How polarization affects human rights treaty ratification by the US Senate, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/288603
