This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/09/world/middleeast/senators-iran-nuclear-deal.html

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
4 More Senators Back Iran Deal, Assuring Cushion for White House 4 More Senators Back Iran Deal, Assuring Cushion for White House
(35 minutes later)
WASHINGTON — Four Democratic senators announced on Tuesday that they would back President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, apparently securing enough votes so that Mr. Obama will not be forced to veto a Republican resolution disapproving of the accord. WASHINGTON — Four Democratic senators announced on Tuesday that they would back President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, apparently securing the White House enough votes so Mr. Obama will not be forced to veto a Republican resolution disapproving the accord.
The White House, which had worked aggressively with Congressional Democrats to build support for the agreement, had been hoping to avoid the diplomatic embarrassment of Mr. Obama being forced to use his veto to defeat a disapproval resolution. The White House, which had worked aggressively with congressional Democrats to build support for the agreement, had been hoping to avoid the diplomatic embarrassment of Mr. Obama being forced to use his veto to defeat a disapproval resolution.
And as critics in Congress prepared to begin a historic debate on the Iran agreement, the support of the four senators — Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Maria Cantwell of Washington, Gary Peters of Michigan and Ron Wyden of Oregon — meant that the Republicans would not have the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster of the resolution. Forty-two Democrats now back the agreement.And as critics in Congress prepared to begin a historic debate on the Iran agreement, the support of the four senators — Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Maria Cantwell of Washington, Gary Peters of Michigan and Ron Wyden of Oregon — meant that the Republicans would not have the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster of the resolution. Forty-two Democrats now back the agreement.
But while the White House appeared to clinch victory, Senate Democrats on Tuesday began their own procedural maneuvering. They argued the Republicans should move immediately to a final vote on the resolution, but one that would require 60 votes for adoption. But while the White House appeared to clinch a victory, Senate Democrats on Tuesday began their own procedural maneuvering. They argued that the Republicans should move immediately to a final vote on the resolution, but one that would require 60 votes for adoption.
That would spare the Democrats from criticism that they had refused to allow an up-or-down vote on the disapproval resolution, thereby stifling debate on one of the most important foreign policy questions of modern times.That would spare the Democrats from criticism that they had refused to allow an up-or-down vote on the disapproval resolution, thereby stifling debate on one of the most important foreign policy questions of modern times.
Republican leaders, however, showed no indication that they would give Democrats even the slightest reprieve. The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, among others, has made clear that Mr. Obama and his fellow Democrats would own the nuclear deal and be held accountable in the event of any breaches by Iran. Even many supporters of the accord say they believe cheating by Iran is inevitable.Republican leaders, however, showed no indication that they would give Democrats even the slightest reprieve. The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, among others, has made clear that Mr. Obama and his fellow Democrats would own the nuclear deal and be held accountable in the event of any breaches by Iran. Even many supporters of the accord say they believe cheating by Iran is inevitable.
Ms. Cantwell was the last Democratic senator to announce her position, and she did so in curt remarks to reporters standing in a basement corridor of the Capitol as she arrived to cast a vote on the confirmation of a federal judge.Ms. Cantwell was the last Democratic senator to announce her position, and she did so in curt remarks to reporters standing in a basement corridor of the Capitol as she arrived to cast a vote on the confirmation of a federal judge.
“I’m for the deal,” she said as she walked quickly to a senators-only elevator, adding that her office would put out a formal statement. “I’m for the deal,” she said as she walked quickly to a senators-only elevator, adding that her office would issue a formal statement.
Shortly after Ms. Cantwell’s announcement, Mr. McConnell went to the Senate floor to denounce Democrats for wanting to block the vote and to criticize the accord as deeply flawed. “The Senate should not hide behind procedure,” Mr. McConnell said. “The American people were led to believe that negotiations with Iran would be about stopping its nuclear program, but that’s not what the deal before us would do.” Shortly after Ms. Cantwell’s announcement, Mr. McConnell went to the Senate floor to denounce Democrats for wanting to block the vote and to criticize the accord as deeply flawed.
“The Senate should not hide behind procedure,” Mr. McConnell said. “The American people were led to believe that negotiations with Iran would be about stopping its nuclear program, but that’s not what the deal before us would do.”
For all the drama leading up to this week’s debate, the other five world powers who helped negotiate the agreement — Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia — have made clear they have no desire to return to the bargaining table, and are likely to ease sanctions against Iran and put the agreement in place regardless of the view ultimately expressed by Congress.For all the drama leading up to this week’s debate, the other five world powers who helped negotiate the agreement — Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia — have made clear they have no desire to return to the bargaining table, and are likely to ease sanctions against Iran and put the agreement in place regardless of the view ultimately expressed by Congress.
Several Democratic lawmakers have cited this reality as a central reason for supporting the accord, so that the United States does not cede its leadership role on the agreement and will remain in a strong position to oversee implementation and enforcement.Several Democratic lawmakers have cited this reality as a central reason for supporting the accord, so that the United States does not cede its leadership role on the agreement and will remain in a strong position to oversee implementation and enforcement.
So far, Republicans have remained united in their opposition to the agreement, with many saying they are convinced that Iran will not live up to its end of the bargain. They are also adamant that Mr. Obama and the Democrats will bear responsibility for the accord, in the event of any breach. So far, Republicans have remained united in their opposition to the agreement, with many saying they are convinced that Iran will not live up to its end of the bargain.
Many Democrats have been torn, particularly in the face of strong opposition by Israel and by some powerful Jewish-American lobbying groups.Many Democrats have been torn, particularly in the face of strong opposition by Israel and by some powerful Jewish-American lobbying groups.
On Tuesday, Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia became the fourth Senate Democrat to publicly oppose the agreement, joining Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Chuck Schumer of New York.On Tuesday, Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia became the fourth Senate Democrat to publicly oppose the agreement, joining Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Chuck Schumer of New York.
Mr. Manchin, who announced his decision in a conference call with journalists from his home state, said that he was concerned not only with stopping Iran from developing a nuclear bomb, but also with addressing Iran’s support of terrorist organizations. He said the deal failed to do that.Mr. Manchin, who announced his decision in a conference call with journalists from his home state, said that he was concerned not only with stopping Iran from developing a nuclear bomb, but also with addressing Iran’s support of terrorist organizations. He said the deal failed to do that.
“I have always believed that to truly be a superpower, you must engage in super-diplomacy,” Mr. Manchin said in a statement. “But as I struggled with this decision, I could not ignore the fact that Iran, the country that will benefit most from sanctions being lifted, refuses to change its 36-year history of sponsoring terrorism.”“I have always believed that to truly be a superpower, you must engage in super-diplomacy,” Mr. Manchin said in a statement. “But as I struggled with this decision, I could not ignore the fact that Iran, the country that will benefit most from sanctions being lifted, refuses to change its 36-year history of sponsoring terrorism.”
By not penalizing Iran, Mr. Manchin said, President Obama’s accord “would reward Iran’s 36 years of deplorable behavior and do nothing to prevent its destructive activities.”By not penalizing Iran, Mr. Manchin said, President Obama’s accord “would reward Iran’s 36 years of deplorable behavior and do nothing to prevent its destructive activities.”
“In fact,” he added, “even during the negotiating process, it has continued to hold four Americans hostage, support terrorism around the world, breed anti-American sentiment and acquire arms from Russia.”“In fact,” he added, “even during the negotiating process, it has continued to hold four Americans hostage, support terrorism around the world, breed anti-American sentiment and acquire arms from Russia.”
Over all, most Democrats have stood with the president. And in the House, where the Democratic leader, Nancy Pelosi of California, has provided a bulwark of support against criticism of the deal, two new votes in favor were announced on Tuesday: William Lacy Clay of Missouri and Bill Pascrell Jr. of New Jersey.Over all, most Democrats have stood with the president. And in the House, where the Democratic leader, Nancy Pelosi of California, has provided a bulwark of support against criticism of the deal, two new votes in favor were announced on Tuesday: William Lacy Clay of Missouri and Bill Pascrell Jr. of New Jersey.
In the event that legislation disapproving the deal wins passage and President Obama is forced to veto it, the House will be first to vote on an override, which requires the support of two-thirds of the chamber. House Democrats say they are confident they will have votes to sustain a veto. In the Senate, where a two-thirds vote is also required, Obama now appears to easily have enough votes to do the same.
On Wednesday, opponents of the Iran deal plan to hold a rally on the West Lawn of the Capitol. Speakers will include Republican presidential candidates like Donald J. Trump, Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, and Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, as well as others like former Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska and the conservative commentator Glenn Beck.On Wednesday, opponents of the Iran deal plan to hold a rally on the West Lawn of the Capitol. Speakers will include Republican presidential candidates like Donald J. Trump, Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, and Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, as well as others like former Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska and the conservative commentator Glenn Beck.
The Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, said at a speech in Washington that Mr. Obama would have the support to put the Iran accord in place.The Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, said at a speech in Washington that Mr. Obama would have the support to put the Iran accord in place.
Calling the Iran issue “a debate that has ignited passions from Tehran to Tel Aviv, from Beijing to Berlin, and from coast to coast across the United States,” Mr. Reid said Mr. Obama’s agreement was “the best pathway to peace and security for America, Israel and our partners,” according to the prepared text of his remarks to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Calling the Iran issue “a debate that has ignited passions from Tehran to Tel Aviv, from Beijing to Berlin, and from coast to coast across the United States,” Mr. Reid said Mr. Obama’s agreement was “the best pathway to peace and security for America, Israel and our partners,” according to the prepared text of his remarks to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
“Today I am gratified to say to my fellow Americans, our negotiating partners, and our allies around the world: This agreement will stand. America will uphold its commitment and we will seize this opportunity to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon,” Mr. Reid said.“Today I am gratified to say to my fellow Americans, our negotiating partners, and our allies around the world: This agreement will stand. America will uphold its commitment and we will seize this opportunity to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon,” Mr. Reid said.
In the Senate, there was some procedural wrangling over how many votes would be required to pass the resolution disapproving the Iran deal, with one Democrat, Tim Kaine of Virginia, insisting there was a prior agreement that it would take a supermajority of at least 60 senators, not just a simple majority.In the Senate, there was some procedural wrangling over how many votes would be required to pass the resolution disapproving the Iran deal, with one Democrat, Tim Kaine of Virginia, insisting there was a prior agreement that it would take a supermajority of at least 60 senators, not just a simple majority.
Mr. Reid did not say that there was such an agreement or requirement, but challenged Mr. McConnell to put the resolution to such a test, noting that the Republican leader has frequently said that all important measures in the Senate should require 60 votes for approval. That position was one Mr. McConnell often espoused when Republicans were the minority party in the Senate.Mr. Reid did not say that there was such an agreement or requirement, but challenged Mr. McConnell to put the resolution to such a test, noting that the Republican leader has frequently said that all important measures in the Senate should require 60 votes for approval. That position was one Mr. McConnell often espoused when Republicans were the minority party in the Senate.
And with the debate formally starting in Congress, other efforts to block the Iran deal appeared to emerge. Some Republican lawmakers, led by Representative Peter Roskam, Republican of Illinois, asserted that any vote was premature because aspects of the agreement had not been disclosed to Congress.And with the debate formally starting in Congress, other efforts to block the Iran deal appeared to emerge. Some Republican lawmakers, led by Representative Peter Roskam, Republican of Illinois, asserted that any vote was premature because aspects of the agreement had not been disclosed to Congress.
Legislation adopted in the spring required the White House to submit the full Iran agreement to Congress, with a 60-day review period to follow. The Republican critics, including Representative Lee Zeldin of New York, said that additional side agreements between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency had not been disclosed.Legislation adopted in the spring required the White House to submit the full Iran agreement to Congress, with a 60-day review period to follow. The Republican critics, including Representative Lee Zeldin of New York, said that additional side agreements between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency had not been disclosed.