Republican Senators Push Back Against Accord Giving WHO Power Over U.S. Pandemic Response

Republican senators push back against the World Health Organization (WHO), as they prepare to meet in Switzerland next Wednesday to negotiate the final terms of an agreement that will give WHO centralized authority over U.S. foreign policy in the event of a Pandemic.

The Draft accordThis would be “legally binding” The WHO has the authority to declare pandemics in all 194 member countries and submits member states to it. “the central role of the WHO as the directing and coordinating authority on international health work,” These include lockdowns and treatments, medical supply chains, surveillance and other areas. “disinformation and false news,” Once a pandemic has been declared.

Ron Johnson (R.-Wis.), led by seventeen U.S. senators introduced the “Without Senate Approval Act, There is no WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty“, February 15, states that the pandemic agreement must be considered a treaty and requires the consent of a supermajority (which is two-thirds of the Senate or 67 senators). As the WHO prepares to present the WHO’s “The World Health Organization”, the legislation is being introduced. “zero draft” of the agreement, ahref=”https://www.who.int/news/item/27-09-2022-joint-statement-of-the-united-states-of-america-and-the-world-health-organization-on-the-u.s.-who-strategic-dialogue”>negotiated Use the help Xavier Becerra, Secretary of U.S. Health and Human Services, sent a message to all member countries on February 27th to reach an agreement on final terms.

Chuck Grassley, Bill Hagerty, John Barrasso and Steve Daines (R–Wyo.) were also sponsors of the bill.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), and Katie Britt (R-Ala.).

“The WHO, along with our federal health agencies, failed miserably in their response to COVID-19,” Sen. Johnson stated. “This failure should not be rewarded with a new international treaty that would increase the WHO’s power at the expense of American sovereignty.”

However, some people doubt that the bill, even if passed, will stop President Joe Biden from implementing the WHO accord once he signs it.

“With all due respect to the sponsoring senators, that will not do the trick,” The Epoch Times heard from Francis Boyle (professor of international law, Illinois University). According to him, the WHO agreement is designed to circumvent the Senate approval process. Congress should stop paying yearly contributions to WHO immediately and pull the United States out.

The United States is currently the largest contributor The WHO’s Budget $6.72 Billion$1.25 Billion is the total. “health emergencies.” The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation provides the following: Second largest China is the third donor to WHO, contributing 9 per cent of its budget in 2021.

Will Biden require Senate approval for the WHO Accord?

It is not clear if Senate approval will be required for the WHO agreement to take effect. The agreement itself says that the accord will be effective and legally binding for member states. “provisionally,” Sign it as soon as you can and before any national legislatures have approved it.

“The Biden administration can indicate that it is provisionally bringing this treaty into force upon the mere signature of the treaty,” Boyle stated. “Hence, it will come into force here in the United States provisionally until the Senate decides whether or not it is going to give its advice and consent to the treaty. I personally know of no other U.S. treaty that provides for its provisional application pending the U.S. Senate giving its advice and consent to the treaty.”

Although the U.S. Constitution provides that the president is allowed to make treaties, “provided two-thirds of the senators present concur,” The United States has seen an increase in presidents signing international agreements without the consent of the Senate. These agreements have been implemented in the United States.

According to the Senate Website: “Treaties to which the United States is a party also have the force of federal legislation, forming part of what the Constitution calls ‘the supreme Law of the Land’ … In recent decades, presidents have frequently entered the United States into international agreements without the advice and consent of the Senate. These are called ‘executive agreements.’ Though not brought before the Senate for approval, executive agreements are still binding on the parties under international law.”

Justia is a legal analysis and marketing company. states that “the executive agreement has surpassed in number and perhaps in international influence the treaty formally signed, submitted for ratification to the Senate, and proclaimed upon ratification.

“During the first half-century of its independence, the United States was party to 60 treaties but to only 27 published executive agreements,” According to the report. “Between 1939 and 1993, executive agreements comprised more than 90 percent of the international agreements concluded.”

Multiple times, the U.S. Supreme Court has supported the notion executive agreements constitute federal laws and supersede state regulations. This includes State of Missouri v. HollandThe Court of Appeal ruled that treaties overrule state laws. United States v. Belmont, The court ruled that executive deals made without consent from the Senate were legally binding on Americans. The U.S. Constitution states that health policy is under the state’s jurisdiction. However, the WHO pandemic agreement may allow health policy to be brought under the control of the federal government after the WHO declares a Pandemic.

The Biden administration is increasingly looking to international agreements to accomplish what can’t be done through Congress. Recently, after Congress failed to raise corporate taxes, the Biden administration entered into an “a href=”https://www.theepochtimes.com/gop-fights-biden-deal-that-lets-other-countries-tax-us-based-profits_5034248.html”>international Agreement with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development To establish minimum tax levels for all corporations in signatory countries. GOP lawmakers stated that the agreement had been negotiated. “no path forward” The agreement was approved as a treaty. It contained provisions that allowed foreign countries to tax U.S. corporate profits as a punitive step if it is not approved by senators.