On Tuesday, President Obama suggested he would support legislation passed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee requiring congressional review of any deal with Iran. We talk to Heritage’s Steven Bucci about what that means.
Was this a victory for those who feel Congress should have a larger voice on the issue?
Unfortunately no. The mark up of the bill went in a bad direction in committee and lowered the bar for blocking a bad Iran deal. This is far from a victory in restraining the president as he makes an unwise deal.
Even worse this action will allow him to silence critics who rightfully are concerned down the road. As the bill stands now Congress has 30 days instead of 60 to review the deal, after it is signed, and they agree not to take any actions before that time. If this bill as written gets through the Congress, the president will have won a significant victory in promoting this flawed agreement with Iran.
So what was the importance of the bill that came out of committee yesterday?
The Sens. Bob Corker, R-Tenn./Bob Menendez, D-N.J./Ben Cardin, D-Md., bill started out as a well-intentioned attempt to get Congress back in the game in reference to the Iran nuclear deal. While presidents have the right to negotiate agreements in the foreign policy realm, an agreement as contentious and important as this one should have significant congressional buy in and support, and not as a mere after thought.
Will this action at least slow down the president’s march to a deal with Iran?
No. Even though it was painted as President Obama “relenting” and agreeing to give Congress this “window” to react, in fact this allows the president to plow forward doing everything he wants to do, while saying that Congress was given an opportunity to act. The deadline for deal is still June 30.
What happens next?
The bill gets a vote in the Senate and then in the House with possible amendments, then possible conference to iron out differences in versions of bill.