House Reactions to Nuclear Deal with Iran

These are just a few statements from the House Representatives about the Iran Nuclear Deal:

I would like to begin by echoing the sentiments of Sam Nunn and Richard Lugar in stating that no arms control deal is ever perfect, and that our overriding objective must be to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. But after carefully weighing all the options and possible outcomes, I do believe that voting for this deal will make it less likely that Iran will develop nuclear weapons. And voting against this deal, with no better options in sight, makes the potential for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon more likely. My support for this agreement is determined not by trust, but by science. -- Bill Foster (D-IL, 11th)

Having read the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), engaging in insightful conversations with both opponents and proponents of the agreement, and listening to my constituents, I have concluded that supporting the agreement is in the best interest of the United States, Israel, and our global community. I arrived at this decision after extensive due diligence and receipt of sufficient answers to questions posed to me. I feel confident that I have made the right decision. -- Marcia L. Fudge (D-OH, 11th)

Nuclear material leaves a radiation signature. We have the capability of reading those signatures and understanding in detail what is going on at any particular site. The verifications in this treaty are built upon the fact that we don’t trust Iran, and therefore, these verification procedures are the most robust, comprehensive, and extensive that have ever been in any proliferation treaty. -- John Garamendi (D-CA, 3rd)
.
I’m voting against the deal. We need to work together to block it so that we can negotiate a stronger agreement. -- Gene Green (D-TX, 29th)

The President’s deeply flawed and misguided deal with Iran is a serious security matter not only for the United States, but also for our allies in the Middle East. I believe we must use all tools possible to stop this deal in its tracks and avoid placing our citizens and allies at greater risk. Accordingly, I implore Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate leadership to use the so-called ‘nuclear option’ to require a simple majority to stop the Iran agreement. To require a super majority on a matter of great importance is improper, is offensive to the majority rule, and is damaging to our great Republic. -- Morgan Griffith (R-VA, 9th)

The so-called “nuclear option” is a waiver of a rule dating back to the 1970’s. This modern filibuster/cloture rule currently in practice in the Senate requires a super majority in order to take a vote on any issue. A single Senator acting anonymously can place a “hold” on legislation by notifying the Senate Majority Leader of his or her desire to “hold” such a bill.

Since November 16, 2012 (soon after the election that left Democrats in control of the White House and the Senate), Griffith has consistently called for the Senate to change this policy and return to its workable historical filibuster rule.

I know many people of good faith have reservations about this agreement. They have concerns about dealing with Iran and ask how we can trust its ruling regime. I don’t trust Iran. Fortunately, as Secretary of State John Kerry has emphasized, there is absolutely nothing in the entire agreement that depends on trusting Iran. Precisely because we have doubts about Iran’s intentions, this deal includes a robust program for verification, monitoring and inspections as well as the ability to reinstate sanctions. Without this agreement, Iran would be free to pursue a nuclear weapon, and the United States and international community would not be able to inspect what is happening in Iran let alone stop it. -- Janice Hahn (D-CA, 44th)

During my service in Congress, I have always believed that we must pursue diplomacy before confrontation, and that war should always be a last resort. I cannot ask the sons and daughters of the families I represent to fight a war without being able to look them in the eye and tell them we have exhausted all available diplomatic means. Congress should give this agreement a chance to work, and I intend to support it. -- Mike Doyle (D-PA, 14th)

This week I will vote to support the JCPOA. This is a vote with enormous consequences for U.S. national security interests. I did not make my decision lightly. Over the past few weeks I spent many hours reading and reviewing the agreement and its classified annex. I received briefings from the Administration and national security, intelligence and non-proliferation experts. I had many discussions with stakeholders who hold passionate views on both sides of the argument and heard from hundreds of my constituents. -- Tammy Duckworth (D-IL, 8th)

The Iran deal 1) does not effectively prohibit nuclear weapons research, enrichment research, miniaturization or delivery work 2) does little to impose actual accountability, and 3) does not dismantle all of Iran’s current nuclear infrastructure.

At its core, the President’s deal is a gamble: a gamble that Iran will uphold its end of the bargain, and that in 10-15 years we will see a gentler, kinder Iran. It’s a gamble that gets Iran what it wants, and leaves America and our allies with the short end of the stick. That’s not a gamble I’m willing to take. -- Randy J. Forbes (R-VA, 4th)

I would like to begin by echoing the sentiments of Sam Nunn and Richard Lugar in stating that no arms control deal is ever perfect, and that our overriding objective must be to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. But after carefully weighing all the options and possible outcomes, I do believe that voting for this deal will make it less likely that Iran will develop nuclear weapons. And voting against this deal, with no better options in sight, makes the potential for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon more likely. My support for this agreement is determined not by trust, but by science. -- Bill Foster (D-IL, 11th)

Obama gets Iran deal win as Senate Dems amass enough votes

President Barack Obama secured a landmark foreign policy victory Wednesday as Senate Democrats amassed enough votes to ensure the Iran nuclear deal survives in Congress, despite ferocious opposition from Republicans and the government of Israel.

Democratic Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland became the crucial 34th vote in favor of the agreement.

"No deal is perfect, especially one negotiated with the Iranian regime," Mikulski said in a statement. She called the accord "the best option available to block Iran from having a nuclear bomb. For these reasons, I will vote in favor of this deal."

Read more about it by clicking HERE

State Department Refuses to Disclose Info on Iran "Secret Side Deals"

Wichita, KS - August 11, 2015 (The Ponder News) -- Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS) issued the following statement after receiving a letter from the State Department in response to his letter to President Obama on July 22, 2015 in which he, Speaker of the House John Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Senator Tom Cotton requested access to the two secret side agreements to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

“The State Department’s response says, in short, that Congress will not receive access to these secret side deals and the U.S. does not even have the right to ask for them. On what theory of international law are we prohibited from even asking for the documents? It seems the Administration would rather feign ignorance of the contents of these secret side deals than to defend the concessions made to the ayatollahs. These side deals go to the heart of whether the Iranian Nuclear Deal can actually be verified.

“The State Department’s response also states that they ‘have been transparent with Congress about the existence of these arrangements since [they] submitted the JCPOA’ on July 19, 2015. Nothing could be further from the truth. So far, the Administration has given seven different answers to the question of whether the side deals exist and who, if anyone, has read them, starting with the July 22 television appearance of State Department Spokesman John Kirby who tried to completely dodged the issue.

“The letter concludes with the sentiment that the ‘level of engagement with Congress . . . has been unprecedented.’ I agree that it has been ‘unprecedented.’ For the President to name call and equate opponents with the Iranian ayatollahs is completely ‘unprecedented.’

“I find the Administration’s response wholly unacceptable and I will continue to pursue access to the secret side deals.”

The full text of the letter from the State Department is below:

Dear Mr. Pompeo:

Thank you for your July 22 letter to President Obama regarding the nuclear deal between the PS+1, coordinated by the European Union, and Iran.

On July 14, the United States and our international partners concluded an historic deal that, if fully implemented, will verifiably prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. This Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is the result of nearly 20 months of intensive negotiations since the PS+1 and Iran concluded the interim Joint Plan of Action. Because of our combined diplomatic efforts, the international community will be able to verify that Iran will not obtain a nuclear weapon, and we will have taken an important step in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons in the Middle East.

This deal is based on verification and requires important compliance monitoring and verification by Iran with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In the JCPOA, Iran committed to take certain steps set forth in the Roadmap agreement negotiated between the IAEA and Iran. This Roadmap and Iran's JCPOA commitment to undertake the steps in it are matters of public record, were posted publicly to the Internet, and were provided to Congress by the State Department on July 19. The IAEA-Iran Roadmap contains steps to clarify possible military dimensions. Under the JCPOA, Iran must complete the steps required of it in this Roadmap by October 15, well in advance of any sanctions relief.

The Roadmap refers to two "separate arrangements" between the IAEA and Iran. Within the IAEA system, such arrangements related to safeguards procedures and inspection activities are confidential and are not released to other member states. The United States does not have a right to demand these documents from the IAEA. However, the United States was briefed on these separate arrangements, and we in tum are briefing Congress on them as well in an appropriately classified setting. We have been transparent with Congress about the existence of these arrangements since we submitted the JCPOA, and we are happy to continue these conversations.

On July 19, Congress was provided with everything agreed between the PS+1 and Iran, in full compliance with the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA). There are no "secret deals" between the PS+ 1 and Iran and no JCPOA documents that Congress does not have. The level of engagement with Congress that we have maintained on the nuclear deal has been unprecedented and we look forward to continuing our close consultations. We hope this information is useful to you. Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,

Julia Frifield
Assistant Secretary
Legislative Affairs

Stuff in the News: Bahrain, Broadband, Iran Nuclear Deal, Power Plant EPA Rule, Jobs Report

Congressman Jim McGovern (D-MA), a senior House Democrat and co-chair of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, joined Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Marco Rubio (R-FL) to announce a bipartisan push to block the sale or transfer of certain arms to Bahrain until the State Department certifies that Bahrain has fully implemented all of the recommendations by an independent oversight commission to strengthen human rights in the country. Congressman McGovern will introduce legislation in the House when Congress returns next month and Senators Wyden and Rubio introduced companion legislation in the Senate earlier this week.

Recalling the success of the New Deal’s Rural Electrification Administration (REA) that began connecting every corner of rural America to the electrical grid in the 1930’s, U.S. Rep. Rick Nolan has introduced legislation to launch a massive effort of similar scope for high-speed broadband. Nolan’s Rural Broadband Initiative Act (H.R. 3152) would lay the foundation for new funding and a coordinated federal strategy to bring 21st Century high-tech communications services to millions of underserved rural people and businesses.

Congressman Gary Palmer (R-AL), signed a letter along with 93 other members of Congress, sent to President Barack Obama, requesting the text of the “side deals” made between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Iranian Government as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), otherwise known as the "Iran Deal."

On Monday, August 3, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a power plant (CO2 ) rule that will not only lead to higher utility bills for hardworking Americans, but will also disproportionately harm millions of millennials and young people comprising the next generation. According to a recent analysis by the Pew Research Center, more than half of America's unemployed are teens and young adults. Teens face a staggering unemployment rate of 18.1 percent. The Pew Research data also shows that the share of young adults now living in their parents’ homes is 26 percent, an increase of 2 percent since 2010. The new 1,500-paged EPA rule forces states to rely on less reliable forms of energy and eliminates the move to natural gas, that has created thousands of jobs in New Mexico and nationally. Congress didn’t vote for the rule. In fact, the House expressly rejected this EPA policy to force the closure of coal-fired power plants nationwide. On June 23, the House passed the Ratepayer Protection Act (H.R. 2042) that would protect consumers from the EPA’s costly, so-called Clean Power Plan. In 2010, a bipartisan coalition in Congress also rejected the Obama Administration’s job-killing cap and trade legislation.

The Department of Labor announced that the economy added 215,000 jobs, and the unemployment rate held steady at 5.3 percent. With businesses adding 210,000 jobs last month and a total of 13 million jobs over the past 65 consecutive months, this is the longest period of private sector job growth in American history.