This morning, President Obama addressed the nation to announce a nuclear deal has been signed with the Islamic Republic of Iran. As noted earlier today in an ARRA News article: The Key Question: Does it Leave America and Its Allies Safer? Additional comments on this topic are reported at the end of this "Today in Washington, D.C. report.
The House reconvened at 10 AM.
Bills (not a complete list) being considered today:
H.R. 2722 — "To require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in recognition of the fight against breast cancer."
H.R. 251 — "To transfer the position of Special Assistant for Veterans Affairs in the Department of Housing and Urban Development to the Office of the Secretary, and for other purposes."
H.R. 1047 — "To authorize private nonprofit organizations to administer permanent housing rental assistance provided through the Continuum of Care Program under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, and for other purposes."
H.R. 2482 — "To amend the Low-Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990."
H.R. 2997 — "To authorize the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to carry out a demonstration program to enter into budget-neutral, performance-based contracts for energy and water conservation improvements for multifamily residential units."
H.R. 1408 — "To require certain Federal banking agencies to conduct a study of the appropriate capital requirements for mortgage servicing assets for nonsystemic banking institutions, and for other purposes."
H.R. 432 — "To amend the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to prevent duplicative regulation of advisers of small business investment companies."
H.R. 1334 — "To amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to make the shareholder threshold for registration of savings and loan holding companies the same as for bank holding companies."
H.R. 1723 — "To direct the Securities and Exchange Commission to revise Form S-1 so as to permit smaller reporting companies to use forward incorporation by reference for such form."
H.R. 1847 — "To amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Commodity Exchange Act to repeal the indemnification requirements for regulatory authorities to obtain access to swap data required to be provided by swaps entities under such Acts."
H.R. 2064 — "To amend certain provisions of the securities laws relating to the treatment of emerging growth companies."
Yesterday the House passed:
H.R. 1023 (Voice Vote) — "To amend the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 to provide for increased limitations on leverage for multiple licenses under common control."
H.R. 208 (Voice Vote) — "To require the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to establish a program to make loans to certain businesses, homeowners, and renters affected by Superstorm Sandy."
H.R. 2499 (410 - 1) — "To amend the Small Business Act to increase access to capital for veteran entrepreneurs, to help create jobs, and for other purposes."
H.R. 2670 (Voice Vote) — "To amend the Small Business Act to provide for expanded participation in the microloan program, and for other purposes."
H.R. 387 (Voice Vote) — "To provide for certain land to be taken into trust for the benefit of Morongo Band of Mission Indians, and for other purposes."
The Senate reconvened at 10 AM today and resumed consideration of S. 1177, the Every Child Achieves Act of 2015.
At 12:10 PM, the Senate voted 45-51 to reject an amendment to the bill from Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) and voted 56-40 to agree to an amendment from Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ).
The Senate then recessed for weekly policy lunches until 2:15 PM.
At 4 PM, the Senate will vote on four more amendments to the bill, offered by Sens. Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Mike Lee (R-UT), and Al Franken (D-MN).
Yesterday, the Senate voted 89-0 to adopt an amendment offered by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and agreed to one from Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) by voice vote.
Senate Majority Leader said in a press release summary this morning: The Senate must now weigh why a nuclear agreement should result in reduced pressure on the world's leading state sponsor of terror. We'll hold hearings and examine the agreement, including several aspects that are particularly integral to understanding what concessions the Iranians were able to secure from the Obama Administration. For example: will the agreement allow for anytime-anywhere inspections of Iranian military installations and research and development facilities; will the Iranians be compelled to disclose possible military dimensions of the nuclear program; what level of research and development will be permitted of advanced centrifuges; and will sanctions relief be tied to strict, verifiable adherence to the terms of the agreement and cooperation by the Iranians? The Senate will review these parameters more thoroughly, and approve or disapprove of the deal in accordance with the <>Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015. The test of the agreement should be whether it leaves our country and our allies safer."
Speaking on the Senate floor this morning, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell explained his initial thoughts on the nuclear agreement with Iran that the Obama administration announced this morning.
"Two weeks ago, I asked the Obama Administration to step back from the Iran negotiations, press pause, and reexamine the point of having talks in the first place. That would have been the most rational and reasonable approach for the White House to take, especially considering that its own allies in the Senate were using phrases like 'deeply worrying' to describe the direction of the talks.
"But instead of taking that time to reexamine basic objectives with its partners and agree on the non-negotiable elements of any deal — things like 'anytime, anywhere' inspections, complete disclosure of previous military-related nuclear research, and phased relief of sanctions tied to Iranian compliance — the White House acquiesced instead to artificial deadline after artificial deadline and opportunity after opportunity for Iran to press for additional concessions along the way.
"The result is the comprehensive nuclear agreement announced today. Given what we do know so far, it appears that Republicans and Democrats were right to be 'deeply worr[ied]' about the direction of these talks.
"It seems Americans in both parties were right to fear that a deal inked by the White House would further the flawed elements of April's interim agreement — that it would aim at the best deal acceptable to Iran rather than one that might actually end Iran's nuclear program.
"Remember: ending Iran's nuclear program was supposed to be the point of these talks in the first place; what's already clear about this agreement is that it will not achieve — or even come close to achieving — that original purpose.
"Instead, the Iranians appear to have prevailed in this negotiation: maintaining thousands of centrifuges and entrenching their threshold nuclear capability instead of ending it, reaping a multi-billion dollar windfall to spend freely on terrorism, dividing our Western allies and negotiating partners — some of whom will now undoubtedly sell arms to Iran — and gaining legitimacy before the world."
There are many troubling details that are appearing in news reports on this deal today.
According to The New York Times, "American officials acknowledged that after the first decade, the breakout time would begin to shrink. It was unclear how rapidly, because Iran's longer-term plans to expand its enrichment capability, using a new generation of centrifuges, will be kept confidential by the Iranian government, international inspectors and the other parties to the accord.
"In an interview with National Public Radio in April, Mr. Obama said that in 'year 13, 14, 15' of the agreement, the breakout time might shrink 'almost down to zero," as Iran is expected to develop and use advanced centrifuges then. . . .
"As news of a nuclear deal spread across Iran, people there reacted with a mix of jubilation, cautious optimism and disbelief that decades of a seemingly intractable conflict could be coming to an end. . . . Iran's president, Hassan Rouhani, who was elected in 2013 on a platform of ridding the country of the sanctions, made a brief statement, saying that the Iranian people's 'prayers have come true.' . . .
"One of the last, and most contentious issues, was the question of whether and how fast an arms embargo on conventional weapons and missiles, imposed starting in 2006, would be lifted. After days of haggling, Mr. Kerry and his Iranian counterpart, Mohammad Javad Zarif, agreed that the missile restrictions would remain for eight years and that a similar ban on the purchase and sale of missiles would be removed in five years."
Reuters reports, "Syrian President Bashar al-Assad signaled on Tuesday he expected more support from his top regional ally Iran in the wake of a nuclear deal that includes Western states that have backed the insurgency against him. Rebels fighting Assad expressed concern that the deal would expand Iranian influence in the region at their expense.
"Iran has provided military and financial support to Assad in the four-year-long conflict that has become a focal point for Shi'ite Iran's power struggle with the conservative Sunni Muslim monarchy of Saudi Arabia. . . .
"Iranian military support for Assad has come in the form of its backing for the Lebanese political and guerrilla group Hezbollah, the deployment of Iranian military advisers, and the mobilisation of Shi'ite fighters from elsewhere in the region."
"And so," Leader McConnell said this morning, "we have the deal we have today. It appears we've lost the chance today to dismantle Iran's nuclear program — and that that will now become a challenge for the next President to confront, regardless of political party. But the Senate has yet to receive the final text of the agreement. We will not come a final judgement until we do. The country deserves a thorough and fair review in the Senate."
He emphasized, "Committees will be holding hearings. Witnesses will be coming to testify. And then, Congress will approve or disapprove of the deal in accordance with the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act. The test of the agreement should be this: will it leave our country and our allies safer?
"There are several things we'll be looking at in particular as we weigh whether it will. Here are few of them:
- Will the agreement allow for 'anytime-anywhere' inspections of military installations and research and development facilities?
- Will the agreement compel the Iranians to disclose the Possible Military Dimensions of their nuclear program?
- Will the agreement make any real impact on Iran's ability to continue researching and developing advanced centrifuges?
- Will the agreement's sanctions relief be tied to Iran's strict adherence to the terms of this deal, and will we have any real way to verify its compliance?
He also pointed out, "I would remind colleagues of the deadly seriousness of the issue at hand. This should not be about some political legacy project. . . .
"Let's not forget: Iran is pursuing a full-spectrum campaign to expand its sphere of influence and undermine America's security and standing in the region. Iran's continued support of terrorism and its determination to expand ballistic missile and conventional military capabilities should be gravely concerning to each of us. They are to me. They pose significant challenges to our country and President Obama's successor. . .
"A bad deal won't make these threats go away. Pretending otherwise won't make us safer."
Leader McConnell concluded, "The White House needs to know that the Congress elected by the people is prepared to do anything it can to make Americans safer. We want to work collaboratively with the President to advance that goal, but if we have to work against a bad agreement to do so — a flawed deal that threatens our country and our allies — we will."
Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning condemned the Iran nuclear deal: "Congressional Republicans tied their own hands in any upcoming attempt to stop the Iran nuclear deal earlier this year when they chose to pass legislation by Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) that turned the normal treaty ratification process on its head by requiring a veto override of two-thirds votes in both houses in order to stop the deal rather than the Constitutionally required two-thirds majority in the Senate for ratification. By creating this much more difficult bar for rejection, Congress inadvertently allowed President Obama to negotiate away any real pretense that Iran will be stopped from getting the bomb, because he no longer feared Senate rejection.
"This concern is being realized around the world as nobody believes that this deal will stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Saudi diplomats are already saying that the deal green lights initiating their own nuclear programs, not for peaceful energy, but for military weapons. Israel has condemned the deal. What does it say when our top allies in the region think this is a bad deal, and that there is now a nuclear arms race in the Middle East?
"The Obama Iranian deal makes proliferation in the region inevitable and, as a result, war more likely, not less. Nuclear non-proliferation, U.S. interests, and our allies interests have all suffered a severe setback today. It makes it much more likely that we will have a nuclear terrorist attack on U.S. soil, and that we will face a new reality as Iranian allies like Venezuela become nuclear threats. The world is less safe, and if Congress fails to defeat this deal, they will have nobody but themselves to blame. After all, with the Corker bill, they ignored warnings from Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) and effectively made disapproving the deal a near impossibility."
In his commentary this morning, Jordan Candler at the Patriot Post said, "If Congress approves the deal — which it surely will — and Iran follows through on some preliminary conditions, the regime will be awarded $100 billion from frozen assets — something over which John Kerry appeared remorseful. 'We realize how deeply the nuclear related sanctions affected the lives of Iranians,' he said.
"Adding insult to injury, according to The Wall Street Journal, sanctions relief 'could help Iran's economy to expand by 7% to 8% annually for years to come.' Leave it to Obama to stimulate Iran's economy more than ours. Israel is understandably infuriated. 'Iran is going to receive a sure path to nuclear weapons,' warned Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"Many of the restrictions that were supposed to prevent it from getting there will be lifted. Iran will get a jackpot — a cash bonanza of hundreds of billions of dollars — which will enable it to continue to pursue its aggression and terror.' Still, that didn't prevent the antagonizer in chief from taking a victory lap. 'The United States, together with our international partners, has achieved something that decades of animosity has not,' Obama proclaimed, 'a comprehensive, long-term deal with Iran that will prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon.'
"In April, Mark Alexander explained that "the central issue is not whether Iran can be trusted, but that Obama can't be trusted." That's what makes this deal so alarming and, indeed, dangerous."
God Help Us!
Tags: U.S. House, U.S. Senate, Congress, President Barack Obama, John Kerry, Iran, nuclear deal, nuclear weapons, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks! 
No comments:
Post a Comment