Jim Jordan, chairman of the tea partying House Freedom Caucus.
The House Freedom Caucus is determined to revive several amendments that the Senate kept out of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, which senators passed 98-1 on Thursday. Stuff like forbidding the president to sign a deal to curb Iran's nuclear program unless Tehran first recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, mandating that he certify that "Iran has ceased all support and funding of terrorism and terrorist activities,” and requiring the director of National Intelligence to certify that Iran has “dismantled its ballistic weapons development and research programs.”
Adopting any of those three would guarantee a veto from President Obama. And it's clear based on the letter to President Obama written by 150 Democratic House members in support of negotiations with Iran that the House would not be able to override that veto. Lauren French and Jake Sherman report:
The move by the conservative House Freedom Caucus could put Speaker John Boehner in a bind. He’ll have to decide whether to clamp down on attempts to change the bill as Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) did in the Senate, angering his right flank — or to allow votes on their amendments at the risk of tanking the legislation authored by Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.). [...]
“The current Corker deal gives the illusion of government oversight while actually just providing political cover,” Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), a Freedom Caucus member, said in an interview. “A number of conservative House members want to encourage our leadership to allow meaningful amendments.”
Meadows may not be right about much, but he's right that the nuclear review bill only gives the illusion of congressional oversight. As passed by the Senate, Congress will get 30 days to review any agreement. If a majority of members don't like it, they'll get a few more days to create and vote for a resolution of disapproval. But the president would veto a disapproval resolution. And there's almost no chance of an override in either the Senate or the House.
Head below the fold for more on this story.
So, like Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Ted Cruz of Texas, these Heroes of the Republic in the House can use a bit of theater to demonstrate to voters how tough they are while running zero risk of actually scuttling a deal with Iran.
Ironically, though they won't cop to it, if they actually could smash a deal, that would make it far easier for Iran to build a nuclear weapon if its leaders chose to do what they say they are not interested in doing. Without a deal requiring intrusive inspections, dismantling a research reactor and cutting back the number of centrifuges enriching uranium, oversight of Iran's nuclear program would continue at the current level. The U.S. and its five partner negotiators as well as the inspectors at the International Atomic Energy Agency say that level isn't thorough enough to detect efforts to build a nuclear bomb should Iran so choose.
The would-be amenders of the review bill keep telling everybody they're only interested in getting a good agreement with Iran. On the contrary, their behavior proves they are intent on wrecking any possibility of having one. What makes their maneuvers even more counterproductive is that, deal or no deal, it's unlikely at least two of the six negotiating nations—Russia and China—will continue past this summer to support U.N. sanctions on Iran. Those sanctions were designed to force Iran to be more transparent about its nuclear program.
So, put on your kabuki masks, House Freedom Caucus, rant your rants and put forth your amendments. None of it will make the slightest difference. But, hey!, a couple of you might get some free media time out of it.