Clinton signed Kyoto, the traitor, and noone treated it as if it were binding.
OK, a little bit of a disclaimer first. I do not agree with this but I have read about this before. The only thing I could find is in a footnote on Wikipedia’s list of U S treaties. Maybe tomorrow I will look around and see if I can find a better source. I do know there are people in our gov’t that don’t think senate approval is necessary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaties_of_the_United_States#Notes_and_references
However, not all international agreements are considered to be treaties requiring Senate concurrence. This is explained somewhat in a letter from U.S. Ambassador Thomas C. Hubbard to Philippine Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago in connection with the RP-US Vishe other countries, derives from the President’s responsibilities for the conduct of foreign relations (Art. II, Sec. 1) and his constitutional powers as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. Senate advice and consent is not needed, inter alia, because the VFA and similar agreements neither change US domestic nor require congressional appropriation of funds. It is important to note that only about five percent of the international agreement entered into by the US Governments require Senate advice and consent.”. The letter is quoted in full in Footnote 42 of “G.R. No. 138570. October 10, 2000”. Retrieved 2009-01-28.