A bipartisan group of powerful House members agreed Wednesday to a resolution defining congressional expectations for a final nuclear deal with Iran, only to have a leading Democrat back out Thursday morning, National Journal Daily has learned.
The language was agreed to Wednesday night, according to congressional aides, after a week’s worth of meetings between top leaders. The talks, initiated by Majority Leader Eric Cantor, were headlined by Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, and ranking Democrat Eliot Engel.
The resolution was set to be introduced on the House floor Thursday, sources said, but Hoyer insisted that his colleagues hold off. It’s unclear whether Hoyer wants to delay the resolution’s introduction indefinitely, or just until lawmakers return from the holiday recess in early January.
“Mr. Hoyer believes Congress has the right to express its views on what should be included in a final agreement, but that the timing was not right to move forward this week,” said Stephanie Young, Hoyer’s spokeswoman.
The resolution harshly admonishes Iran for violating international agreements on uranium enrichment and ballistic-missile development, and for continuing production of materials that could produce nuclear weapons. It condemns Iran for sponsoring terrorism and human-rights abuses.
The resolution expressly states that sanctions brought Iran to the negotiating table, and that Congress supports diplomatic negotiations but that all options need to remain on the table.
According to aides with knowledge of the talks, Hoyer requested certain changes to the language of the resolution on Wednesday night. When they were agreed to, all four members signed off, and Hoyer asked that the announcement not be made until Thursday morning. Then, on Thursday morning, Hoyer “backed off” the agreement, an aide said.
The group, which has emphasized strong bipartisan consensus on this issue, decided to hold off on introducing the resolution without Hoyer.
“I’ve always said that I think it’s important for foreign policy to be bipartisan whenever possible,” Engel had said on Wednesday night. He said then that while the group was “close” to an agreement, nothing would be introduced until all members involved were satisfied with the product.
Cantor spokesman Rory Cooper said, “The leader is disappointed we could not move ahead with the agreed-on resolution this week, but he will continue to work with Whip Hoyer, Chairman Royce, and Congressman Engel to get it to the floor as soon as possible.”
The initial Iran agreement, reached late last month, softened some economic sanctions in exchange for Iran freezing parts of its nuclear program. But that deal, designed to create six months of negotiating space to reach a broader agreement, provoked a flurry of bipartisan criticism on Capitol Hill.
The resolution agreed to on Wednesday calls for imposing additional sanctions on Iran if it violates the terms of the interim deal.
Cantor first informed his Republican colleagues last week that he and Royce were looking for Democrats who could work with them to craft language that would “speak volumes” about congressional expectations for an agreement.
Significantly, the resolution would go much further than the interim agreement with Iran in several ways.
On the subject of enrichment, the resolution states that it is “the policy of the United States that no nation, including Iran, has an inherent right to enrich uranium.”
The resolution calls for “dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure … such that Iran is prevented from pursuing both the uranium and plutonium pathways to a nuclear weapon.”
The resolution notes that the International Atomic Energy Agency has reported that Iran has continued to enrich uranium as recently as November, in violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions.
The language also lays out the threat posed by Iran, stating that it has approximately “19,000 centrifuges, which have the capacity to enrich uranium in a matter of weeks to levels that would provide sufficient fissile material for a nuclear explosive device.”
What We're Following See More »
President Obama became a surprise topic of contention toward the end of the Democratic debate, as Hillary Clinton reminded viewers that Sanders had challenged the progressive bona fides of President Obama in 2011 and suggested that someone might challenge him from the left. “The kind of criticism that we’ve heard from Senator Sanders about our president I expect from Republicans, I do not expect from someone running for the Democratic nomination to succeed President Obama,” she said. “Madame Secretary, that is a low blow,” replied Sanders, before getting in another dig during his closing statement: “One of us ran against Barack Obama. I was not that candidate.”
It’s all about the 1% and Wall Street versus everyone else for Bernie Sanders—even when he’s talking about race relations. Like Hillary Clinton, he needs to appeal to African-American and Hispanic voters in coming states, but he insists on doing so through his lens of class warfare. When he got a question from the moderators about the plight of black America, he noted that during the great recession, African Americans “lost half their wealth,” and “instead of tax breaks for billionaires,” a Sanders presidency would deliver jobs for kids. On the very next question, he downplayed the role of race in inequality, saying, “It’s a racial issue, but it’s also a general economic issue.”
It’s been said in just about every news story since New Hampshire: the primaries are headed to states where Hillary Clinton will do well among minority voters. Leaving nothing to chance, she underscored that point in her opening statement in the Milwaukee debate tonight, saying more needs to be done to help “African Americans who face discrimination in the job market” and immigrant families. She also made an explicit reference to “equal pay for women’s work.” Those boxes she’s checking are no coincidence: if she wins women, blacks and Hispanics, she wins the nomination.
Under pressure from a judge, the State Department will release about 550 of Hillary Clinton’s emails—“roughly 14 percent of the 3,700 remaining Clinton emails—on Saturday, in the middle of the Presidents Day holiday weekend.” All of the emails were supposed to have been released last month. Related: State subpoenaed the Clinton Foundation last year, which brings the total number of current Clinton investigations to four, says the Daily Caller.