A potential showdown is looming between Senate Democrats and the White House over Iran, one that could lead to the first successful veto override of President Obama’s tenure.
On one side are Hill Democrats who—along with Republicans—want to weigh in on Iran’s nuclear program. On the other is the White House, which has said that any statement from Congress would jeopardize a long-term deal to dismantle the country’s nuclear capabilities. Obama has vowed to veto any legislation that imposes sanctions, urging Congress to “hold your fire” while talks continue.
Twelve Democrats in the Senate have in the past cosponsored legislation to impose sanctions on Iran. If they all continue to call for the sanctions, it would put the Senate close to the two-thirds majority necessary to override Obama’s veto; supporters would need just one more vote if all 54 Republicans support the bill.
Obama has vetoed only two bills in six years, and neither was overridden. More vetoes are likely on tap now that Republicans control both chambers of Congress—on issues ranging from the Keystone XL pipeline to Obama’s executive actions on immigration—but no current issue other than Iran seems as likely to attract the number of Democrats necessary for an override.
Democrats who favor more sanctions on Iran say they need hard details from the administration about the progress it has made in two years of talks. How many reactors are still functioning? How much uranium do the Iranians have?
“Are they allowing full access? Just someone give me an update. Help us make a decision on the bill,” said Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who has supported sanctions in the past but is undecided on how he will vote when the Senate takes up a sanctions bill later this month.
Democrats aren’t yet willing to discuss bucking Obama in such a public fashion, according to aides, but the possibility is certainly there. It’s difficult for any lawmaker to vote against a punishment for Iran, and those who are frustrated with how the talks are going could egg everyone else on.
“I think there are some who are more anxious, want to create some incentive for the Iranians to do the right thing, putting pressure on them prospectively,” said Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois. “Others, like myself, feel like this is once-in-a-political-lifetime opportunity. I just don’t want to jeopardize negotiations.”
Asked if a sizable number of Democrats would vote against Obama’s wishes on the issue, Durbin would only say, “The operative word there is ‘sizable.’”
Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey is leading the charge among Democrats who want Iran sanctions. He will get the chance Wednesday to lay out his argument for imposing sanctions if the talks with Iran fail. As the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Menendez will have his best opportunity yet to air his concerns that the talks have dragged on for too long (since 2013) with the United States having little to show for it.
The Foreign Relations Committee will receive a formal update Wednesday from State and Treasury Department officials at a hearing on the Iran nuclear talks. Later in the day, the Senate Banking Committee will have a classified briefing on the same topic, according to Chairman Richard Shelby of Alabama.
Any Iran-sanctions bill must ultimately go through the Banking Committee, but the Foreign Relations panel offers the first peek at the intensity of the conflict between Democrats who favor sanctions and the White House. Menendez, with Republican Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois, is proposing new sanctions that would not take effect until July, a deadline that the United States, Iran, and several European countries have already agreed to for reaching a deal.
Menendez is taking a nonconfrontational tone, according to an aide, noting that his legislation would allow Obama to delay the sanctions if he thinks they are close to a deal. He wants the sanctions to be “prospective,” meaning a backstop for the United States if Iran walks away before the deadline. Nothing happens until then.
Menendez is a feisty senator, unafraid to dress down people who don’t offer compelling arguments or can’t back up their requests with facts. He clashed with Obama at the Democrats’ retreat last week over Iran. But if he wants to win over enough Democrats to send a message to Obama that the Congress should play an active role in the negotiations, he needs to make sure everyone knows that his sanctions bill is respectful of the White House’s negotiating position. At the same time, the global situation is changing with a variety of bold actions from Iran, including the recent detention of a Washington Post reporter, that could warrant a statement from Congress.
The next step for the legislation will be the Banking Committee, which is expected to vote on it next week. GOP aides expect the bill to be on the Senate floor after the completion of the Keystone XL pipeline debate, which is likely to continue through the month.
What We're Following See More »
In a speech that began a bit like a State of the Union address, President Obama said the "country is stronger and more prosperous than it was" when he took office eight years ago. He then talked of battling Hillary Clinton for the nomination in 2008, and discovering her "unbelievable work ethic," before saying that no one—"not me, not Bill"—has ever been more qualified to be president. When his first mention of Donald Trump drew boos, he quickly admonished the crowd: "Don't boo. Vote." He then added that Trump is "not really a plans guy. Not really a facts guy, either."
Tim Kaine introduced himself to the nation tonight, devoting roughly the first half of his speech to his own story (peppered with a little of his fluent Spanish) before pivoting to Hillary Clinton—and her opponent. "Hillary Clinton has a passion for children and families," he said. "Donald Trump has a passion, too: himself." His most personal line came after noting that his son Nat just deployed with his Marine battalion. "I trust Hillary Clinton with our son's life," he said.
Michael Bloomberg said he wasn't appearing to endorse any party or agenda. He was merely there to support Hillary Clinton. "I don't believe that either party has a monopoly on good ideas or strong leadership," he said, before enumerating how he disagreed with both the GOP and his audience in Philadelphia. "Too many Republicans wrongly blame immigrants for our problems, and they stand in the way of action on climate change and gun violence," he said. "Meanwhile, many Democrats wrongly blame the private sector for our problems, and they stand in the way of action on education reform and deficit reduction." Calling Donald Trump a "dangerous demagogue," he said, "I'm a New Yorker, and a know a con when I see one."
Vice President Biden tonight called President Obama "one of the finest presidents we have ever had" before launching into a passionate defense of Hillary Clinton. "Everybody knows she's smart. Everybody knows she's tough. But I know what she's passionate about," he said. "There's only one person in this race who will help you. ... It's not just who she is; it's her life story." But he paused to train some fire on her opponent "That's not Donald Trump's story," he said. "His cynicism is unbounded. ... No major party nominee in the history of this country has ever known less."
According to the most recent Gallup poll, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are equally disliked. The poll, conducted between July 18 and July 25, shows both major party candidates for president are viewed favorably by 37 percent of respondents and unfavorably by 58 percent of respondents. This poll is bad news for Clinton, who has received better favorable and unfavorable ratings in nearly every poll over the last year.