Washington ? A women’s rights treaty endorsed by the United Nations 23 years ago and signed by President Carter in 1980 but never ratified is gaining renewed momentum in the U.S. Senate.

“It is long past time we join the rest of the world,” said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He is conducting hearings on the treaty and pushing for ratification by the Senate.

	The Treaty for the Rights of Women was endorsed in 1979 by the United Nations.It condemns discrimination against women in any form and urges nations to adopt laws that ensure women will be offered the same access to education, health care, employment and chances of running for political office.

The Treaty for the Rights of Women condemns discrimination against women in any form civil, political, economic, social and cultural. It also urges nations to adopt laws that ensure women will be offered the same access to education, health care, employment and chances of running for political office.

The current State Department has classified it as “generally desirable,” but has twice refused to send anyone to testify before Biden’s committee, arguing that the treaty is under review by the Justice Department.

The treaty has been signed and ratified by 169 countries. The United States is one of 22 countries in the world that has not ratified it.

“We are standing with nonratifying countries like Syria, Iran and Somalia,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., who has pushed the Foreign Relations Committee for years for a hearing on the matter. “In my opinion, this is a disgrace.”

The treaty has been in legislative purgatory for years. Both President Reagan and President George Bush refused to seek Senate ratification. The Clinton administration sought it, but Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., then chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, blocked it, saying the treaty had a “radical anti-family agenda.”

Supporters say the treaty has improved women’s rights worldwide, persuading many governments, especially in poor countries, to suppress violence against women and improve their access to education and health care. They argue that by ratifying the treaty, the United States would gain respect and leverage in negotiations on human rights issues.

Treaty defenders also note that both previous Republican administrations signed similar U.N. treaties on issues like genocide, torture, race, civil and political rights.

Those who oppose the treaty say it is vague and Third World leaders use their support of it to defend themselves from accusations of having poor records on women’s rights. Even though the treaty uses strong words like “mandates,” “requires” and “obligates,” the treaty gives no real enforcement authority to the United Nations. Instead it requires only a periodic report and review process.

“It hasn’t made any difference” in eliminating discrimination against women, said Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo.