[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 96 (Thursday, June 24, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5394-S5409]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  COMPREHENSIVE IRAN SANCTIONS, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND DIVESTMENT ACT OF 
                        2010--CONFERENCE REPORT

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to the consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 
2194, the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act. There will be 2\1/2\ 
hours of debate equally divided between the leaders or their designees.
  The Senator from Utah.
  Mr. BENNETT. Madam President, I see the chairman of the Banking 
Committee. If I have preempted him, I will be happy to delay my 
remarks.
  Mr. DODD. No, please proceed.
  Mr. BENNETT. Madam President, I was a member of the conference that 
dealt with the bill that is now before the Senate, and I wish to make a 
few remarks in favor of the conference report.
  Iran poses an interesting threat to the United States and to our 
allies in the Middle East. The Iranian regime is arguably the most 
anti-American regime in the world. There may be some who would put 
forth North Korea or some other countries, and I won't debate with them 
where on the list they would be, but Iran is very much at the top of 
the list of regimes that hate America. Ironically, every indication is 
that the Iranian people do not support the position of their government 
and that the Iranian people, if they had a legitimate government; that 
is, one that was chosen by a legitimate election, would be strongly 
pro-America. So we have this very challenging dichotomy here of a 
regime that is bent on mischief or worse throughout the region, and a 
very clear hatred for America, presiding over a population that is 
strongly in favor of America.
  I make that point because many people will say: Well, it is the 
people of Iran who will be punished if this sanctions bill goes 
forward.
  I say it is the people of Iran who are desiring relief from their own 
government, and anything we can do to punish that government, make the 
situation more untenable, and ultimately help bring it down will be for 
the benefit of the people of Iran. So I am standing here as an advocate 
in favor of the Iranian population even as I have harsh things to say 
about the Iranian Government.
  There are those who say: Well, the Iranians have every right to a 
nuclear capability. They are a sovereign nation. They have the right to 
build a nuclear plant within their borders so they can have the 
benefits of nuclear power. And you, Senator Bennett, are a supporter of 
nuclear energy, so why do you oppose the Iranian effort with respect to 
their nuclear program?
  I do not oppose a program that would move toward peaceful 
exploitation of nuclear power. Indeed, I would welcome it and support 
it. In the world today, it is certainly possible, and, indeed, many 
countries do have nuclear capability without creating the capacity to 
produce a nuclear weapon. The two are not necessarily simultaneous and 
coterminous. A nuclear capacity to provide electricity, to provide 
power for the populous as a whole, is a good thing, a benign thing, and 
something I support.
  The Iranians oppose any kind of effort to put limits on their plan, 
on their program. They say: We are doing this just for domestic power 
purposes. But they refuse to take the kinds of steps other nations have 
taken that will allow them to have all of the benefits of a domestic 
nuclear plant and none of the challenges that go with the creation of a 
nuclear weapon.
  There was a time--the Cold War and shortly after the Second World 
War--when nuclear weapons were seen as a very viable part of the 
military arsenal. We have such an arsenal. The Soviet Union did. Some 
of our allies joined us, and nuclear weapons were seen in the classic 
power struggle between nation states. Today, however, the situation has 
changed, and a nuclear weapon is seen primarily as a blackmailing 
device for one nation to threaten another nation in a circumstance 
different from the kind of confrontation we had with the Soviet Union. 
If Iran got a nuclear weapon, they would use it as a destabilizing 
instrument throughout the Middle East, which is already one of the 
least stable portions of the world, and other countries all around Iran 
would say: Well, if they are going to have a nuclear weapon for 
blackmail purposes within foreign policy discussions, we will have to 
have one too. And if Iran is allowed to get a nuclear weapon, the 
proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region will be enormous.
  As long as they just use it as a blackmail weapon and talk about it, 
one could say it is really not that big of a deal. Inevitably, the 
creation of such weapons, the proliferation of such weapons in an area 
as unstable as the Middle East runs a very high risk that one of those 
weapons will be used. Then we will see the opening of a nuclear 
holocaust the likes of which we have not seen before. The last time a 
nuclear weapon was used was when we were in the midst of a horrendous 
war where the projections were that if we stayed in a conventional 
pattern and invaded Japan in a conventional way, the casualties would 
be overwhelming on both sides. And by using a nuclear weapon to bring 
the Second World War to an end, we tragically cost tens of thousands of 
lives in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but we saved millions of lives on the 
beaches and in the streets of Tokyo and in the other places that would 
have been lost if the war had continued with conventional weapons.

  We cannot do anything that would encourage Iran with respect to its 
nuclear program, and that is why this act is so important.
  People will say: Well, it is economic sanctions, it is financial 
sanctions, things of that kind. Yes, it is all of those things, but it 
is aimed primarily at and focused entirely on Iran's efforts with 
respect to the creation of a nuclear weapon.
  Iran could get out from under these sanctions immediately if they 
would say: We will follow the pattern of other peaceful nations and 
pursue a nuclear domestic program for energy purposes in such a way 
that it will not lead to the creation of a capability for nuclear 
weapons. I stress again the division between the two: You can have 
nuclear power for energy and electricity without producing the kinds of 
things that are necessary to produce a nuclear weapon. Iran could go 
down that road if they choose to, and if the Iranian regime were to 
make that very wise decision--wise for themselves and their own ability 
to remain at the head of a country whose population hates them; wise 
for the region; wise for the world as a whole--I would be one of the 
first to stand and say that this bill of sanctions for Iran should be 
withdrawn. The initiative rests with them, not with us, as to what will 
happen in the Middle East.
  All right. Some specifics about the legislation. If it is 
implemented, it would dramatically raise the price Iran will have to 
pay for their activities because it will increase the scope of 
sanctions already authorized under the Iranian sanctions act by 
imposing sanctions on foreign companies that sell Iran goods, services, 
or know-how that would assist in its nuclear sector. It includes a 
provision with respect to refined petroleum being exported to Iran.

[[Page S5395]]

It is interesting that Iran is one of the major sources of crude oil, 
but they do not have refined petroleum available to them in the 
quantities they need within their own shores.
  So they import it and this sanctions act will seriously hamper the 
importation of refined products. The legislation mandates that in order 
to do business with the U.S. Government, a company must certify that 
it--or its subsidiaries--does not engage in sanctionable activities 
with respect to Iran.
  Financial. The conference report imposes severe restrictions on 
foreign financial institutions that are doing business with key Iranian 
banks, and it bans U.S. banks from engaging in financial transactions 
with foreign banks doing business with the IRGC, the Islamic 
Revolutionary Guard Corps.
  In effect, the act says to foreign banks doing business with the 
blacklisted Iranian entity that you have a stark choice: Cease your 
activities, or be denied access to the American financial system.
  There are other provisions, which I will not take the time to 
outline. I close by making it clear, once again, that this is not a 
knee-jerk reaction on the part of Americans in a fit of pique with 
respect to the Iranians because the Iranian President says stupid 
things in international fora. This is a deadly serious attempt to see 
to it that a significant threat in the region does not go forward. In 
the end, this is an attempt to help free the Iranian people from the 
tyranny of one of the most repressive and difficult governments that 
any country is forced to abide by in the world.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina is recognized.
  Mr. BURR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business for 1 minute.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                         Commending John Isner

  Mr. BURR. Madam President, it is appropriate that the occupant of the 
Chair and I are here at the same time.
  I rise to congratulate North Carolina native John Isner for not only 
surviving the longest tennis match in Wimbledon history but for 
emerging victorious over Nicolas Mahut of France. Clocking in at over 
11 hours, this first round match was historic in its length and its 
number of games--138 in the fifth set alone.
  Picking up this morning at 59-59 in the fifth set, the match 
continued with no break points until John hit a final backhand to 
finish the match in front of a packed, standing-room only crowd of 
amazed fans. Throughout that grueling competition, Isner maintained an 
impressive sense of calm under pressure, serving his opponent a record-
breaking 112 aces.
  In addition to impressive play, John showed great respect and honor 
for his opponent after the match, and he displayed the kind of 
sportsmanship and chivalry that are often forgotten in today's sports 
world.
  This extraordinary match will not only be remembered in the history 
books but by all sports fans who witnessed the incredible competitive 
spirit of these two great athletes.
  John, congratulations to you, and we are pulling for you in the next 
round.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut is recognized.
  Mr. DODD. Madam President, before the Senator leaves the floor, I 
didn't watch the match. I am in a conference committee, and that 
process has gone on for about a year and a half--for years--which may 
be a record as well. I also commend that young man from North Carolina. 
I congratulate the Presiding Officer and the other Senator from North 
Carolina--the young man, more importantly, who went through the 
grueling process of a lengthy tennis match.
  Mr. BURR. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. DODD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator 
Mikulski be recognized after I complete my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DODD. Madam President, as chairman of the Banking, Housing, and 
Urban Affairs Committee, and as the cochair of the conference 
committee, along with Howard Berman, the Congressman from California, I 
want to begin by thanking my fellow conferees.
  You have heard from Senator Bennett of Utah, a conferee; Senator 
Menendez, of New Jersey; John Kerry, of Massachusetts; my colleague 
from Connecticut, Joe Lieberman; Senator Shelby of Alabama; Senator 
Lugar, the former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee--
John Kerry is currently the chairman of the Foreign Relations 
Committee, and Senator Lieberman is the chairman of the Homeland 
Security Committee. So we have had some very active members, along with 
the House conferees. Numerous members in the House, as well, have 
played a significant role in the development of this conference report.
  I also commend the administration, and particularly the Secretary of 
State, our former colleague, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and 
her staff for the remarkable job they have done over these many weeks, 
when we have tried to craft this very important piece of legislation. 
They were excellent in their work and did a wonderful job.
  Obviously, the President, first and foremost, deserves credit for 
insisting upon a multilateral approach, which they, to a large extent, 
achieved.
  This legislation complements that international effort. Three decades 
ago, when I was serving in the other body--with a full head of black 
hair in those days, so that is going back in time--the House 
International Relations Committee collaborated with the Senate Banking 
Committee to produce what was called landmark legislation in 1977. It 
was called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, known as 
IEEPA, which is how I will refer to the International Emergency 
Economic Powers Act.
  To this day, IEEPA empowers Presidents of the United States to apply 
strong sanctions against any nation, organization, or person that poses 
an ``unusual and extraordinary threat'' to the United States. It is 
with these authorities that American Presidents, over the years, have 
effectively enforced trade embargoes against, in this case, Iran, 
banning exports and imports, and freezing key Iranian assets.
  While IEEPA authorities have kept the U.S. businesses from entering 
Iran, years ago, it had become very clear--abundantly clear--that much 
more was needed to be done, not only in the case of Iran but other 
nations as well.
  That is why, in 1996, the Senate Banking Committee and the House 
Foreign Affairs Committee once again collaborated to develop new 
sanctions on non-U.S. businesses investing in Iran's energy sector.
  Oil and gas was providing Iran's terrorist regime with key sources of 
revenue, and action was needed to be taken. In those days, the 
resulting Iran-Libya Sanctions Act--later named the Iran sanctions act 
because Libya complied with the concerns we had at the time. As a 
result of them stepping forward and renouncing terrorism, we were able 
to drop Libya from the title of that bill. As I heard Senator Bennett 
say--and I think other colleagues would join in this--there is no great 
joy in crafting this bill. We are doing so out of defense of our Nation 
and over a threat being posed by the Government of Iran. We hope that 
they will understand the seriousness of this endeavor, the 
collaborative nature of our efforts, and we hope they will see the 
light as Libya did, and we urge them to take the proper steps to remove 
the threat they are presently posing.
  Regrettably, despite a very clear mandate, American Presidents have 
failed to comply with the law, ISA legislation, adopted back in 1996, 
despite billions of dollars in oil and gas investments.
  How have administrations avoided complying with the law we passed in 
1996? Frankly, that has been the subject of considerable discourse 
within the Banking Committee over the last number of years.
  First, when the Iran sanctions act mandates that American Presidents 
``shall'' impose two out of a menu of six penalties on sanctionable 
foreign companies, it only says that Presidents ``should'' investigate 
credible evidence of energy investments and ``should'' make 
determinations that they have, in fact, engaged in sanctionable acts.
  Thus, administrations since 1996 have simply avoided launching 
investigations and making those determinations.

[[Page S5396]]

  Executive branch officials of both parties have conceded that they 
did not even want to waive sanctions. Waiving imposition of sanctions, 
they have contended, is an admission of a foreign company's guilt. If 
we are, in effect, imposing a sanction on a company, and then 
officially relieving them of U.S. penalties, we are impinging on those 
companies' reputation and implying that the companies outside the U.S. 
jurisdiction are nonetheless in violation of our laws.

  Such extraterritorial provocations might be grounds for retribution--
either through reciprocal sanction or trade barriers. Thus, 
administrations--Democrats and Republicans--have avoided even launching 
the ISA investigations called for in 1996 or, of course, making any 
determinations so as not to resort to sanctions waivers.
  Administrations have certainly used the threat of imposing these 
sanctions to some effect. But as multiple reports by the Congressional 
Research Service and the GAO have indicated, investments in Iran's 
energy sector have continued, and the regime in Iraq has benefited from 
those revenues.
  This measure that I am today managing, along with others, marks a new 
chapter in Congress's long history of confronting the Iranian threat. 
But far more importantly, the conference report, which we will be 
voting on later this afternoon, we are considering makes profound 
changes to the law, which, if implemented correctly, will bring about 
strong pressure to bear on Tehran in order to combat its proliferation 
of weapons of mass destruction, support for international terrorism, 
and gross human rights abuses.
  The act says, in no uncertain terms, that Presidents shall be 
required, if they have established that credible evidence of a firm 
engaging in ISA-sanctionable activity exists, to launch investigations, 
make determinations, and ultimately impose sanctions on those companies 
investing in Iran's energy sector.
  Moreover, it imposes new sanctions on companies providing refined 
petroleum products or helping to build Iran's domestic refineries.
  In response to Tehran's terrible abuses of its own people--Senator 
Lieberman has gone on at some length about this, and he is absolutely 
correct, a major part of the report focuses on the Iranian people and 
what they are subjected to on an hourly basis by a government which the 
majority of people in that country abhor. In the wake of what they have 
been doing and Iran's fraudulent presidential election, the conference 
report and the act imposes visa, property, and financial sanctions on 
Iranians the President determines to be complicit in serious human 
rights abuses against other Iranians on or after the date of Iran's 
election.
  The conference report and the act imposes a U.S. Government 
procurement ban on foreign companies doing energy business in Iran or 
helping the Iranian Government to monitor and jam communications among 
its people. No longer will U.S. taxpayers' money be used to support 
Iran's corporate sponsors.
  The act further codifies trade restrictions in law and ends the few 
remaining Iranian imports allowed into the United States.
  Similarly, the legislation also allows States, local governments, and 
private investors to exercise their own right to divest from companies 
investing in Iran's energy sector.
  The act explicitly states the sense of Congress that the United 
States should support the decisions of State and local governments to 
divest from these firms and clearly authorizes divestment decisions 
made consistent with the standards of the act.
  Elsewhere in the act and the conference report legislation is a 
provision cracking down on the international black market weapons 
trade, which rogue countries, such as North Korea and Iran, have long 
exploited. Under this act, the United States will identify countries 
that are allowing sensitive U.S. technology that can be used for 
weapons of mass destruction or terrorism to be transshipped into Iran, 
and it will force these countries to cooperate in establishing 
appropriate customs, intelligence gathering, and trade restrictions. If 
they refuse to cooperate with the United States, the act requires 
imposition of severe export restrictions on those countries.
  Finally, the act establishes a very strong new banking section to be 
undertaken by the Under Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and 
Financial Intelligence, Stuart Levey, and his colleagues. Stuart Levey 
has worked in two administrations now and should be highly commended, 
by the way, for the remarkable work he has done over the years. This is 
an official of the Treasury Department who is so knowledgeable on this 
subject matter and was invaluable in helping us craft this legislation. 
I especially mention him and thank him for his contribution.
  This new section takes aim squarely at Iran's powerful Revolutionary 
Guard Corps--or the IRGC, as it is known--and attempts to choke it off 
from an increasingly important source of power--international financial 
investment.
  Section 104 of the act has two principal parts. First, the Treasury 
will direct American banks to prohibit or impose strict conditions on 
correspondent or payable-through accounts of any foreign financial 
institutions working with key Iranian entities.
  For example, foreign banks conducting substantial business with the 
IRGC, its front companies or affiliates, will be cut off from its 
American accounts. Hypothetically, then, if an Asian or Latin American 
bank were to provide services to an IRGC-owned construction company, 
for instance, building a major gas pipeline, that bank would be shut 
off from U.S. correspondent banking.
  In addition, foreign banks servicing the various Iranian banks 
blacklisted by the Treasury Department and the UN Security Council will 
also be targeted under this section.
  Section 104 directs the Treasury to restrict correspondent banking 
for foreign banks directly involved in Iran's weapons of mass 
destruction proliferation and terrorist financing, as well as money 
laundering toward those aims.
  In the end, the act presents foreign banks doing business with 
blacklisted Iranian entities a very stark choice: Cease your activities 
or be denied critical access to America's financial system.
  The second part of section 104 would hold U.S. banks accountable for 
actions by their foreign subsidiaries. Under IEEPA, which I described 
earlier, U.S. companies have long been banned from doing business with 
Iran. Now under this act, this conference report, foreign entities 
owned or controlled by U.S. banks will also be prohibited from doing 
business with the IRGC. If their foreign subsidiaries continue to do 
so, the U.S. parent companies will be subjected to severe penalties--
civil fines amounting to twice the value of the transaction or $250,000 
and criminal fines if there is proven willful intent, up to $1 million, 
and 20 years in jail.
  To be sure, we have included waivers in the act. We believe that the 
President of the United States must have flexibility in executing 
foreign policy. We all agree with that point. As I mentioned before, 
foreign nations consider ISA waivers to have extraterritorial impact on 
companies in their jurisdiction.
  For the most part, waivers of the sanctions in this act may only be 
exercised if they are deemed necessary to the national interest or, in 
the case of energy investment and refined petroleum sanctions, if the 
companies are from nations cooperating in multilateral efforts against 
Iran. Reports to Congress are to be detailed about the particular 
investments or transactions considered sanctionable, as well as why 
these waivers are invoked.
  Only in the case of refined petroleum sanctions do we allow for some 
additional flexibility. In that case, the President of the United 
States may delay making determinations about the sanctionability of 
specific transactions every 6 months if the President can demonstrate 
progressively greater reductions in refined petroleum transportations 
in Iran.
  These are very tough unilateral measures, but Congress does not 
expect them to effect change in a vacuum. Unilateral sanctions are but 
one tool of statecraft available to American Presidents to effect such 
change. In my view, they are less likely to be effective than tough, 
coordinated, multilateral sanctions.
  All of us recognize that acting alone we may achieve some results. 
Acting

[[Page S5397]]

together, we have the opportunity to truly bring about the desired 
change we all seek.
  These unilateral sanctions must be exercised as part of a 
comprehensive, coordinated diplomatic and political effort conducted in 
cooperation with our allies and designed to achieve the real results we 
all seek.
  I believe President Obama has been both thoughtful and deliberate in 
his approach to pressuring Iran to change its conduct. Having just this 
month achieved UN Security Council approval of Resolution 1929 and 
European Union endorsement of additional energy and financial measures 
on Iran, the President of the United States is clearly setting the 
stage for what we all hope is strong, targeted, and effective 
multilateral and multilayered pressure on Tehran.
  These measures are not ends but merely a means to an end, first and 
foremost, to suspend Iran's illicit nuclear program, to protect Israel 
and our other friends and allies, to combat Tehran's proliferation of 
weapons of mass destruction, and express support for human rights in 
their country.
  I see my colleague from Arizona. I believe it was his suggestion that 
the human rights effort be part of this legislation. I did not have a 
chance to mention him earlier in my remarks. I thank my colleague for 
this proposal which includes very strong language and a message to the 
Iranian people that this is not about them, this is about their 
government. It is very important that all of us in our remarks today 
make it clear that we are tremendously sympathetic to what they are 
going through and, therefore, part of our proposal has strong language 
that allows us to address--at least to try to address--the issue of 
human rights abuses in Tehran. Again, I appreciate all the hard work.
  I mentioned the conferees earlier: my colleague from Connecticut, 
Senator Lieberman, Senator Menendez, Senator Kerry, Senator Shelby, 
Senator Bennett, and Senator Lugar, from the Senate perspective who 
were part of drafting this bill, as well as our House conferees, led by 
Howard Berman of California. I extend a special thank you to all of 
them for their leadership.
  I also thank Senator Reid, the majority leader, and Senator 
McConnell. None of this ever happens without the majority leader of the 
Senate taking a leadership role and insisting this matter move forward, 
insisting it be addressed before we break for the July 4 recess period 
coming up next week and in the midst of all the other things in which 
we have been involved. My colleagues know we have been involved in a 
very lengthy conference regarding financial reform. I am delighted to 
take some time out from that effort to address this particular proposal 
and urge our colleagues to be supportive of this proposal.
  I also want to support what I mentioned earlier--President Obama's 
approach--and I appreciate his team's work in helping us improve this 
important legislation. I mentioned earlier our Secretary of State and 
former colleague. We had extensive meetings with her, National Security 
Adviser, General Jones, Deputy Secretary of State Steinberg, Under 
Secretary of the Treasury Levey--I mentioned the tremendous work he has 
done, Stuart Levey in the Department of Treasury--Assistant Secretary 
of State Verma, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Cohen, and Office 
of Foreign Assets Control Director Adam Szubin. All of these people, 
and many others, along with our staffs--and I am particularly grateful 
to my staff for the work they have done, led by Colin McGinnis of my 
office, who did a remarkable job in pulling this together to see to it 
that we worked with our counterparts, and there are many others on my 
staff as well I should mention.
  Neal Orringer from my office deserves great credit for his work as 
well. It has been a great pleasure working with Rick Kessler, Shanna 
Winters, Alan Makovsky, and Daniel Silverberg.
  Additionally, I thank Ranking Member Richard Shelby, along with his 
talented counsel, John O'Hara.
  I also thank Margaret Roth-Warren, our brilliant, detail-oriented 
legislative counsel who spent weeks on end working with my staff and me 
and others to make this, hopefully, the most comprehensive and 
effective sanctions legislation that we can include.
  I have hopefully mentioned all the appropriate members of the staff. 
There is always a danger of leaving someone out. I do not want to do 
that. They work very hard. These are the unknown people we do not 
always get to recognize. They spent countless hours pulling this most 
comprehensive sanctions conference report together. We are very 
grateful to all of them and the tremendous work they do every single 
day.
  I know my colleague from Maryland wishes to be heard. I yield the 
floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Franken). The Senator from Maryland.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to support the passage of the 
Comprehensive Iran Sanctions conference report.
  Mr. President, you know me. I am a plain and a straight talker, so I 
am not going to use the flowery language of diplomacy or Senate speak 
on a lot of the language. I am going to say this in plain English.
  Today, if you want to improve the safety and security of the United 
States of America, you want to pass this bill. If you want to make sure 
we ensure the safety and security of our allies in the Middle East, you 
want to pass this bill. If you want to identify who is one of the major 
enemies of the United States and our allies, it is Iran.
  If one looks at the world, peace in the Middle East lies not through 
Jerusalem but lies through Tehran. What does Tehran do? Tehran funds 
Hamas, which is causing untold heartbreak and bloodshed in Gaza. No. 2, 
it funds Hezbollah, funding untold terrorist activity in the north of 
Israel and in Lebanon. No. 3, it is also working to develop nuclear 
weapons. We do not want Iran to have nuclear weapons.
  What has Iran been doing over the last several years? They have had a 
record of denial and deception in developing nuclear weapons, in 
processing weapons-grade uranium. They have also been developing the 
method for delivering nuclear weapons, the so-called Shahab-3 ballistic 
missile. It is capable of striking Israel, U.S. troops in Iraq and 
Afghanistan, and even parts of Europe. We do not want Iran to continue 
to develop nuclear weapons.
  We have been down this road before. And people say: Right, let's stop 
them, let's go to the U.N., hoo-ha for the U.N. We have done hoo-ha 
with the U.N. We have had several sanctions. We had one most recently 
passed that our administration worked very hard on, and we thank our 
allies for that. But the U.N. sanctions, though a good first step, are 
quite tepid. They are tepid because there are other members of the 
Security Council who want to keep doing that business with Iran. You 
might want to do business with Iran, but Iran has no business 
developing nuclear weapons.
  The United States, therefore, has to pass these unilateral sanctions. 
That is why I support them. It is the United States, the indispensable 
Nation, that can come up with the muscle to be able to do this.
  This is a very serious matter. If Iran continues to develop these 
weapons, it is going to destabilize the world. First of all, it 
emboldens the regime that is currently in power. That regime is no 
friend to peace, it is no friend to stability, it is no friend to us or 
our allies.
  Second, a nuclear Iran would destabilize pro-western Arab states. 
Those states with strong ties to the United States are apprehensive 
about Iran continuing to develop nuclear weapons capability.
  Also, nuclear arms and missiles could pose a major threat to the 
United States. A nuclear Iran would spur in the region a nuclear arms 
race, and it would end a lot of our antiproliferation efforts.
  These sanctions are absolutely important. I think they are very 
creative, and I think they go right to the heart of the Iranian 
leadership's pocketbook.
  One of the most creative aspects of this legislation is the sanctions 
on Iran's petroleum industry. Iran has oil wells, but it does not have 
a major refining capacity. It imports over 40 percent of its gasoline.
  This legislation in this bill that targets refined petroleum products 
I believe could have a crippling effect. With its importation of 40 
percent gasoline and the need for them to have enormous subsidies to 
keep gasoline low with their population will be very effective.

[[Page S5398]]

  It also targets Iran's banking system. Essentially, it says it 
requires foreign financial institutions to choose between doing 
business with Iran or doing business with U.S. banks. Make your choice. 
If you think the future lies with doing business with Iran, that is one 
view. But if you see your future doing business with U.S. banks, I 
think the path is clear, and they will choose the safety and security 
and reliability of doing business in the United States. I also like the 
fact that it strengthens the prohibitions on activities on the nuclear 
program.

  What was also spoken about--and I salute my colleague from Arizona 
for also insisting on this--is the support for human rights in Iran.
  We all remember that awful day when this wonderful, heroic young 
woman who wanted to engage in the civic activities in her own country--
Neda--was gunned down in her own country by her own people. Recently, I 
watched a very telling and poignant documentary about Neda and the 
dissidents in Iran. What a wonderful group of young people there is in 
that country. Wow, wouldn't we like to see them flourish? Wouldn't we 
like to see a modern Iran that joins the community of nations, 
promoting peace, stability, increased literacy, and opportunity in that 
country?
  I am for those human rights' people. I am not only going to mourn 
Neda as a symbol, but I think the way we can mourn Neda is to back the 
people like her in Iran. And I really do support this human rights 
activity by imposing travel restrictions and financial penalties on 
those who crack down on human rights in Iran.
  Some countries on the Security Council, as I said, are more concerned 
about their relationships with Iran for investment purposes. We have to 
start thinking about investing in the safety and stability of the 
world.
  I urge the passage of this Comprehensive Iran Sanctions Act, and I 
say this is a good and important step. And those who vote for it--and 
we are going to do it on a bipartisan basis because when we do that, we 
govern the best--are also going to have to stand ready to really have a 
very muscular and aggressive approach to the enforcement of these 
sanctions.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle to minimize the opportunity for Iran to continue to get its 
nuclear weapons and to practice its denial and deception, to promote a 
free and open Iran, to stand with the dissidents, and to promote human 
rights. Let's look for a more modern Iran in the 21st century. They 
have a great history. I want them to have a great future and to join 
the community of nations in a nonproliferation environment and work for 
the good of us all.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I congratulate the Senator from Maryland 
on her good remarks and her continued advocacy for human rights 
throughout the world.
  I rise to speak on behalf of the legislation before us--the Iran 
Sanctions Accountability and Divestment Act. It has been a long time in 
the works, and a lot of Members and staff have put a tremendous amount 
of work into it, and I appreciate that commitment. This is an important 
piece of legislation. It comes at a critically important time.
  Despite a year and a half of engagement, the Iranian Government 
continues to respond to the President's outstretched hand with an 
unclenched fist. The regime continues to support terrorism and violent 
Islamic extremist groups that are destabilizing governments and 
societies in the region. It continues to race toward a nuclear weapons 
capability, in full violation of its international agreements and 
contrary to the repeated demands of the community of civilized nations. 
Beyond all of this, the Iranian regime, now more than ever, continues 
to brutalize and oppress its own people, denying them their most basic 
human rights.
  This bill represents the most powerful sanctions ever imposed by the 
Congress on the Government of Iran. It will target industries--
especially Iran's energy sector--that help to sustain the Iranian 
regime's pursuit of nuclear weapons. The bill will create significant 
new incentives for multinational companies to divest from the Iranian 
economy. Because of this legislation, we will be posing a choice to 
companies around the world: Do you want to do business with Iran or do 
you want to do business with the United States? We don't think that is 
much of a choice, but we will force companies to make it. They can't 
have it both ways.
  I didn't wish to confine our sanctions efforts only to those persons 
in Iran who threaten our security and that of our allies. I also wanted 
to bring the full force of America's economic power to bear against 
those in Iran who threaten that country's peaceful human rights and 
democracy advocates. That is why, earlier this year, my good friend 
Senator Joe Lieberman and I joined with a broad bipartisan group of 
Senators to cosponsor legislation to create a new regime of targeted 
sanctions against human rights abusers in Iran. The provisions of our 
legislation have been included in this comprehensive sanctions 
legislation, and I would like to thank the conferees and the leaders of 
both parties for agreeing to include it.
  Our part of this comprehensive sanctions bill has two parts:
  First, it will require the President to compile a public list of 
individuals in Iran who--starting with the fraudulent Presidential 
election last June--are responsible for or complicit in human rights 
violations against Iranian citizens and their families no matter where 
in the world those abuses occur. It doesn't matter whether these 
individuals are officials in the Iranian Government or serving as their 
agents in paramilitary groups and other bands of thugs; we will find 
and uncover them all. I want to stress that this will be a public list, 
posted for all the world to see on the Web sites of the State 
Department and Treasury Department. We will shine a light on Iran's 
human rights abusers. We will publish their names and their faces, and 
we will make them famous for their crimes.
  Second, this bill will then ban these Iranian human rights abusers 
from receiving visas and impose on them the full battery of sanctions 
under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act--that means 
freezing any assets and blocking any property they hold under U.S. 
jurisdiction and ending all of their financial transactions with U.S. 
banks and other entities. These provisions mark the first time the U.S. 
Government has ever imposed punitive measures against persons in Iran 
because of their human rights violations. In short, under this 
legislation, Iranian human rights abusers will be completely cut off 
from the global reach of the U.S. financial system, and that will send 
a powerful signal to every country, company, and bank in the world that 
they should think twice about doing business with the oppressors of the 
Iranian people.
  It also sends an unequivocal and powerful message to the people in 
Iran who are demonstrating and working peacefully for their human 
rights that we share their interests and their struggles. We are not 
simply focused on the regime's nuclear program, although that remains a 
key concern, nor are we solely focused on the regime's support for 
terrorism, although that too remains a high priority. We are also 
making the human rights of Iran's people an equal priority of our 
government.
  Now more than ever, it is urgent and essential that we support the 
peaceful aspirations of the Iranian people. One year ago, the 
conventional wisdom in the West held that the prospect for political 
evolution in Iran was dim and distant. But, as it often is, that 
conventional wisdom was utterly wrong. After the Iranian people were 
denied their right to a free and fair election, the world watched in 
awe as a sea of protestors--by some estimates, as many as 3 million 
Iranians--swelled in the streets all around the country. Ordinary 
Iranians realized they could not remain neutral in the struggle for 
human rights in their country, and they became part of it. As a result, 
history was made before our very eyes. One year ago, democratic change 
in Iran looked rather improbable. Just 1 week later, it looked 
virtually inevitable.
  Unfortunately, the ensuing crackdown has been and continues to be as 
swift as it is brutal. Peaceful protestors have been attacked in the 
streets by masked agents of the Iranian regime, then dragged away to 
the

[[Page S5399]]

darkest corners of cruelty. Many have been raped and worse. Many of 
Iran's best and brightest have been forced to flee in fear from the 
land they love and to seek asylum in places such as Iraq and Turkey, 
where they remain today as refugees. We have all read the desperate 
pleas of terrorized Iranians as they shout for help through whatever 
cracks they continue to try to make in Iran's government-censored 
Internet. And, of course, on June 20 of last year, the entire world 
watched as a young woman named Neda bled to death in the streets of 
Tehran. On that day, I believe we witnessed the beginning of the end of 
this offensive government in Iran.
  The past year's events have demonstrated the true character of Iran's 
people: proud, talented, the stewards of a great culture, eager to 
engage with the world, and relentless in their quest for justice--and a 
nation that should be a natural ally of the United States.
  The past year's events have also highlighted the true character of 
the Iranian regime: a violent and militarized tyranny, self-serving and 
unconcerned with the welfare of Iran's people, with no shred of 
legitimacy left to justify its rule.
  Anymore, we cannot separate the behavior of Iran's government from 
its character. After all, is it any wonder that a regime that has no 
regard whatsoever for the rights, the dignity, the very lives of its 
own people would also show the same blatant disregard for its own 
international agreements, for the sovereignty and security of its 
neighbors, and for the responsibilities of all civilized nations? And 
is it any wonder that this Iranian regime has been and will always be 
uncompromising in its pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability--not just 
because it would be a source of power in the world but perhaps more 
importantly because it would be a source of safety and survival for its 
corrupt, unjust system at home.
  My friends, I believe that when we consider the many threats and 
crimes of Iran's Government, we are led to one inescapable conclusion: 
It is the character of this Iranian regime, not just its behavior, that 
is the deeper threat to peace and freedom in our world and in Iran. 
Furthermore, I believe it will only be a change in the Iranian regime 
itself--a peaceful change, chosen by and led by the people of Iran--
that could finally produce the changes we seek in Iran's policy.
  Even now, though, we hear it said again that Iran's democratic 
opposition has been beaten into submission. And I would not deny that a 
regime such as this one, which knows no limits to its ruthlessness, 
will achieve many of its goals for now. But when Iran's rulers are too 
afraid of their own people to tolerate even routine public 
demonstrations on regime holidays, as they recently have been, that is 
not a government that is succeeding. It is a cabal of criminals who 
understand that their morally bankrupt regime is now on the wrong side 
of Iranian history.
  The question we must answer is, What side of Iranian history are we 
on? We must also ask ourselves another question: Is the goal of our 
sanctions and those of our friends and allies to persuade Iran's rulers 
to finally sit down and negotiate in good faith, to stop pursuing 
nuclear weapons, supporting terrorism, and abusing their own people? I 
truly hope this is possible, but that assumption seems totally at odds 
with the character of this Iranian regime.
  For that reason, I would suggest a different goal: to mobilize our 
friends and allies and like-minded countries, both in the public sphere 
and the private sector, to challenge the legitimacy of this Iranian 
regime and to support Iran's people in changing the character of their 
government--peacefully, politically, on their own terms, and in their 
own ways.
  Of course, the United States should never provide its support where 
it is unrequested and unwanted, but when young Iranian demonstrators 
write their banners of protest in English, when they chant ``Obama, 
Obama, are you with us or are you with them?'' that is a pretty good 
indication that we can do more, and should do more, to support their 
just cause.
  We need to stand up for the Iranian people. We need to make their 
goals our goals, their interests our interests, their work our work. We 
need a grand national undertaking to broadcast information freely into 
Iran and to help Iranians access the tools to evade their government's 
censorship of the Internet. We need to name and shame, pressure and 
even penalize any company that sells Iran's government the tools it 
uses to oppress its people and block their access to information. We 
need to let the political prisoners in Iran's gruesome gulags know they 
are not alone, that their names and their cases are known to us and 
that we will hold their torturers and tormenters accountable for their 
crimes.
  Finally, we need the administration to use the new authorities this 
bill creates to impose crippling sanctions on Iranian human rights 
abusers--to go after their assets, their ability to travel, and their 
access to the international financial system.
  If there were ever any doubt, the birth of the Green Movement over 
the past year should convince us that Iran will have a democratic 
future. That future may be delayed for a while, but it will not be 
denied. Now is the time for the United States to position ourselves 
squarely on the right side of Iranian history. The Green Movement lives 
on. Its struggle endures, and I am confident that eventually--maybe not 
tomorrow or next year or even the year after that--eventually Iranians 
will achieve the democratic changes they seek for their country. The 
Iranian regime may appear intimidating now, but it is rotting inside. 
It has only brute force and fear to sustain it, and Iranians won't be 
afraid forever.
  I am pleased we have finally finished this important piece of 
legislation. I am pleased it contains tough, targeted human rights 
sanctions. I urge my colleagues on a bipartisan basis to pass this 
bill.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, the Senate has now turned its attention 
to the conference report on the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions 
Accountability and Divestment Act of 2010.
  It is a very significant piece of legislation, an excellent 
conference report that holds some hope of being effective and as 
important as anything. It is totally bipartisan which, as we know, does 
not happen here every day. It speaks to the unity of Members of 
Congress and the American people on the threat represented by the 
nuclear weapons development program of Iran.
  More than a year ago, Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, Senator Evan Bayh, 
and I joined to introduce the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act. 
Over the course of last year, more than three-quarters of the Members 
of the Senate decided to cosponsor our bill. The core provisions of 
that legislation have now been incorporated into this conference 
report. To me that means that today, as a body, we have the opportunity 
to reaffirm the overwhelming bipartisan support for Iran sanctions that 
exists in Congress and, by doing so, send an unambiguous and united 
message of determination and strength to the fanatical anti-American 
regime in Tehran.
  It was my privilege to serve on the conference committee that 
produced the legislation that is before us. This bill, when enacted, 
will be the most powerful and comprehensive package of sanctions 
against the current regime in Iran that has ever been passed by 
Congress. I am tremendously grateful to the leadership of the 
conference cochairs, beginning with my senior colleague and dear friend 
for so long, Senator Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and, on the House 
side, a great legislator and leader, Congressman Howard Berman of 
California. These two guided this critically important legislation to 
the point we are at now, which is the verge of passage by both Houses 
of Congress.
  I also want to say how grateful I am to the majority and Republican 
leaders of the Senate, Senators Reid and McConnell, for their steadfast 
bipartisan leadership in ensuring we adopt this time-sensitive 
legislation as soon as possible. Particularly, the goal was before July 
4. I hope and believe the Senate will pass this legislation today, and 
the House of Representatives will do the same shortly thereafter, maybe 
even before. I also hope and believe President Obama will then sign the 
bill into law.
  Just as importantly, it is critical that the Obama administration 
forcefully and proactively implement the provisions of this legislation 
once it becomes law. The measures imposed by

[[Page S5400]]

this conference report, together with the sanctions adopted at the 
United Nations and by like-minded nations, including particularly our 
allies in Europe and around the world, offer our last best hope of 
peacefully preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability 
and thereby making our world much more dangerous than it is today. The 
stakes for our security are great, and time is of the essence.
  It is also critical that the Obama administration quickly makes use 
of these new authorities provided by this legislation, particularly the 
new authority to cut off foreign banks from the U.S. financial system, 
if they continue doing business with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard 
Corps, its front companies, and designated Iranian banks. We are, in 
this legislation, when implemented, giving foreign banks a choice. Do 
they want to do business in the United States or do they want to 
continue to do business with the fanatical regime in Iran? Our 
government must investigate and then impose sanctions--and I will use 
Secretary Clinton's words, ``crippling sanctions''--on those foreign 
companies that prop up the Iranian regime by continuing to invest in 
its energy sector or by exporting refined petroleum products to Iran.
  This legislation gives the administration a strong new opportunity to 
make clear also that America is on the side of the Iranian people, the 
brave Iranian people who are struggling against the repressive regime 
in Tehran. What the administration can do is use the new authority it 
is given in this legislation to publicly identify those individuals in 
the Iranian Government responsible for perpetrating human rights 
violations in Iran since the June 12, 2009 election and holding those 
people accountable for those abuses through targeted sanctions.
  It is always important to remember--and we have seen this throughout 
history--that a nation that represses the rights of its own people is 
much more likely to be a nation that will be a danger to the people and 
countries in its neighborhood and, with modern weapons, 
intercontinental ballistic missiles, nuclear weapons, ultimately, the 
people of the entire world.
  I am pleased that this provision on human rights in Iran is in this 
sanctions legislation, because I believe history has shown that 
America's foreign policy is always at its best and most effective when 
we are true to the fundamental human values that defined our Nation at 
its birth and at our best ever since--the self-evident truth that all 
people are created equal and endowed by our Creator with those equal 
rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The people of 
Iran are denied those rights by their own government. We are saying in 
this legislation that that ought to be also, as well as the support of 
their nuclear weapons program, a sanctionable offense.
  I hope and pray the combined sanctions--U.N., EU, and now U.S.--will 
change the mindset, the calculations of the Iranian regime. But we must 
also recognize that every day that passes brings Iran closer to the 
point of nuclear no return and greatly increases the danger and 
insecurity throughout the Middle East and throughout the world. With 
every day that passes, the Iranians enrich more uranium and their 
stockpile of fissile material grows. Ultimately, we must do whatever is 
necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons capability.
  Almost everybody--really everybody I have heard speak on this 
subject--regardless of party or position in the American Government, 
makes that statement. It is unacceptable to the United States and the 
world for Iran--this fanatical state, this rogue state--to acquire 
nuclear weapons capability, and we must do whatever is necessary to 
prevent this from happening--through peaceful and diplomatic means, if 
we possibly can; through military force, if we absolutely must.
  Iran must not be allowed to become a nuclear power. That is the 
bottom line. That is precisely why I am so grateful and proud and 
hopeful, as we take up and--I am confident--adopt this conference 
report and this legislation today.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, the conference report before us today 
attempts to deal with one of the most important and difficult national 
security challenges we face: the Islamic Republic of Iran--a country 
whose leaders disregard international norms, abuse the rights of their 
own people, support terrorist groups, and threaten regional and global 
stability.
  Iran's continued refusal to be open and transparent about its nuclear 
program jeopardizes the security of its neighbors and other countries 
in the Middle East. There is a strong, bipartisan determination in this 
Congress to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. President Obama 
has focused considerable effort towards that goal. He has said ``the 
long-term consequences of a nuclear-armed Iran are unacceptable'' and 
that he doesn't ``take any options off the table with respect to 
Iran.'' I support that view, and if Iran pursues a nuclear weapon, all 
options, including military options, should be on the table.
  The United States and the international community remain committed to 
trying to solve these especially difficult problems peacefully. The 
administration has sought through a variety of means to engage the 
government of Iran and make clear the benefits to their nation and its 
people if Iran complies with international norms. Through six U.N. 
Security Council resolutions, the latest passed just this month, along 
with numerous U.S. laws and executive orders, the United States has 
sought, unilaterally and with our international partners, to persuade 
Iran to abide by its international obligations. The goal of all these 
actions has been to make Iran understand in practical terms the 
consequences of its actions.
  So far, Iran has refused to listen. That is why the conference report 
we consider today is so important. If we are to resolve our differences 
with Iran, hopefully without resorting to military action, we must 
exhaust every opportunity to make clear, without any room for doubt, 
the price Iran will pay for its continued violations of U.N. 
resolutions.
  The measure before us will sanction Iran for its willful misbehavior, 
and it will penalize multinational firms that support Iran. More 
specifically, it will sanction firms that sell Iran refined petroleum 
or refining products, or goods, services or information that help it 
develop its energy sector; ban U.S. banks from transacting with foreign 
financial institutions that do business with Iran's Islamic 
Revolutionary Guard Corps, an organization that combines a key 
component of Iran's military establishment with an extensive business 
empire that represses Iran's citizens; broaden sanctions available 
under the Iran Sanctions Act by adding to the menu of available 
sanctions a ban on access to foreign exchange in the United States, a 
ban on access to the U.S. financial sector and a ban on U.S. property 
transactions; ban companies that assist Iran in blocking the free flow 
of information or restricting its citizens' freedom of speech from 
contracting with the U.S. Government, and require that companies 
bidding on U.S. Government contracts certify that they and their 
subsidiaries do not engage in sanctionable conduct; and strengthen the 
U.S. trade embargo against Iran by putting into law longstanding 
executive orders and limiting the goods exempted from the embargo.
  While passage of this conference report--just like the U.N. Security 
Council's passage of Resolution 1929 on Iran--is important, it is 
critical that this law be implemented vigorously. It also will be 
critical that the U.N. panel created by Security Council Resolution 
1929 is active in its efforts to identify non-compliance of any U.N. 
member states. Iran's continued unwillingness to disclose fully and 
completely information about its nuclear program surely means that Iran 
is either pursuing a nuclear weapon or preserving options to develop a 
nuclear weapon. It is only from full implementation of this law and 
pressure from the international community that Iran may be dissuaded 
from this course.
  The measures contained in this conference report would exact a real 
price from Iran for its continuing threats to international peace and 
security. Only by forcing Iran to pay such a price, and by penalizing 
the abettors of Iran's actions in violation of U.N. resolutions, can we 
bring Iran into compliance with its responsibilities under 
international law and human rights standards.

[[Page S5401]]

  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today, Congress takes an important and 
forceful step to address one of our most serious national security 
challenges to America and our allies. A nuclear armed Iran would pose 
an intolerable threat to our ally Israel, risk igniting an arms race in 
what is already one of the world's most dangerous regions, and 
undermine our global effort to halt the spread of nuclear weapons.
  These steps to increase pressure are necessary because Iran continues 
to defy the international community, the International Atomic Energy 
Agency, and the U.N. Security Council. Iran's publicly disclosed stocks 
at its Natanz enrichment facility now include more than 2,400 kilograms 
of reactor-grade low enriched uranium. It is especially troubling that 
Iran has recently begun enriching small quantities of uranium to a 
concentration of around 20 percent, crossing yet another nuclear 
threshold.
  That is why, as part of a comprehensive and international effort to 
persuade Iran to alter its current dangerous course, we in Congress 
have worked together to pass tough new sanctions that will increase the 
cost that Iran must pay for its continued defiance. In particular, this 
legislation targets businesses involved in refined petroleum sales to 
Iran, support for Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, and Iran's nuclear 
program. It imposes strong penalties on those in the Iranian government 
who have abused the rights of their own people. It tightens the 
enforcement of those sanctions already on the books. And it takes 
important steps to ensure that companies receiving U.S. Government 
contracts are not also doing business that enables, directly or 
indirectly, Iran's nuclear program.
  This cannot be an American effort alone and, thankfully, it isn't. 
Our own efforts are now joined by U.N. Security Council Resolution 
1929, as well as a range of follow-on efforts from European and other 
allies. It is very important that we work to ensure that all of these 
efforts are coordinated into a comprehensive strategy--and I am 
confident that we have done so.
  As we implement these new sanctions, expanding and preserving a 
muscular international effort must remain a priority. The joint 
explanatory statement accompanying the act suggests that, before 
exercising the 4(c)(B) waiver, a determination of sanctionability must 
be made. We understand that some may believe that the closely 
cooperating waiver may be available without a determination having been 
made. While different from the views in the joint explanatory 
statement, we accept that this may be a fair reading of the obligations 
under section 4(c)(B).
  In the face of a serious threat, Congress has put aside bipartisan 
divisions to act decisively. Even as we negotiated the details, we were 
united by a common goal: to bring maximum leverage to bear on Iran to 
change its behavior and abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions.
  It is important to note that the President's willingness to explore a 
diplomatic solution is a crucial reason why today it is Iran--not those 
who seek to pressure Iran--who is isolated. Recent experience suggests 
that neither sanctions nor engagement alone will convince Iran to 
abandon its nuclear program. Only by combining both pressure and 
diplomacy into a comprehensive and coordinated strategy will we have a 
chance at altering Iran's behavior.
  Finally, we do not seek to punish the people of Iran, but to persuade 
the Iranian regime to do what is in their best interests and the 
world's. These sanctions bring us one step closer to peacefully 
resolving this grave threat.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the 
conference agreement on H.R. 2194, the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, 
Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010.
  Through both its actions and statements, the government of Iran has 
proved itself to be a destabilizing and dangerous regime in an already 
volatile region. The Iranian government's ongoing uranium enrichment 
program, its deplorable human rights record, and its material support 
of terrorist organizations dictate that we confront the threat it poses 
to the world.
  Two weeks ago, the United Nations Security Council voted to approve a 
fourth round of sanctions against Iran, and I commend President Obama 
and his Administration for working with our partners at the U.N. to 
send a powerful message about the willingness of the global community 
to stand firmly in the face of Iranian aggression. However, the specter 
of an Iran which has the fissile materials necessary to fuel a nuclear 
weapon is too great a threat to leave entirely to multilateral 
institutions. The United States and other concerned nations must 
buttress the U.N. Security Council's actions individually to ensure 
maximum pressure on the Iranian government.
  That is why I am proud to vote today in support of the conference 
agreement on the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and 
Divestment Act. The bill before us would impose new economic penalties 
against foreign companies that sell Iran goods and services that assist 
it in developing its energy sector, and it would give the President the 
tools to hold accountable those entities linked to Iran's brutal 
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, its illicit nuclear program, or its 
support for terrorism.
  By broadening the categories of transactions that trigger sanctions 
and increasing the number of sanctions available to the President, this 
legislation will bolster our diplomatic efforts by targeting the 
Iranian regime at its weakest point: its economy, which is still highly 
dependent on its petroleum sector.
  Lastly, while this legislation represents a vital step forward in our 
efforts to constrain the Iranian government's hostile policies, it is 
absolutely crucial that this Congress work closely with the 
administration to make certain these new tools are implemented and 
applied effectively to achieve our objectives. Many of our global 
partners maintain trade and investment ties with the Iranian regime, 
and I implore the President and the Secretary of State to utilize this 
month's growing momentum to ensure the global community is speaking 
with one voice when it comes to preventing the rise of a nuclear Iran.
  I am proud to join my colleagues in the Senate in passing the 
Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act, and I 
am hopeful this will send a compelling message to the rest of the world 
as the global community works together to halt Iran's uranium 
enrichment program.
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in strong support of 
the conference report to accompany the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, 
Accountability, and Divestment Act. I want to thank my colleagues, 
Chairman Dodd, and House Foreign Affairs Chairman Howard Berman and 
Ranking Member Ileana Ros-Lehtinen for working cooperatively to 
complete work on this conference report.
  There is general agreement that the existing Iran Sanctions Act has 
not worked either in practice or in its intent to stop Iran's nuclear 
program or its support of terror. Iran, today, is a more dangerous 
rogue state than ever before.
  Though not a silver bullet, the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, 
Accountability, and Divestment Act is undoubtedly one of the toughest 
sanctions measures that Congress has produced and promises to be more 
effective than current law.
  The act continues to prohibit investments of $20 million in Iran's 
energy sector, but now we have closed an earlier investment loophole 
that allowed for sales of petroleum-related goods, services, and 
technology to Iran.
  The act also broadens the categories of transactions that trigger 
sanctions to include sales to Iran of refined petroleum products and 
prohibits any assistance to Iran to either increase or maintain its 
domestic refining capacity.
  In addition to the existing menu of six sanctions, we have 
established three new sanctions on foreign exchange, access to the U.S. 
banking system, and against property transactions. Under current law, 
the President must choose two from a menu of six sanctions. He now must 
impose at least three of the nine sanctions.
  Despite dozens of credible reports of investment violations over 
successive administrations, there has been but one Presidential 
determination of a violation made 12 years ago. In that particular 
instance, the President waived the imposition of sanctions.

[[Page S5402]]

  This act will put an end to that practice. The sanctions regime will 
now require the President to investigate a report of sanctionable 
activity and make a determination whether a violation has occurred. 
That determination must be reported to Congress and if a violation has 
occurred, the President must impose sanctions or give the specific 
reasons why a waiver of the sanctions is necessary. Prior law merely 
authorized a President to investigate. It did not require a President 
to investigate or make a determination if he chose to investigate.
  A brand new mandatory financial sanction imposes severe restrictions 
on foreign banks doing business with Iranian banks or the IRGC--Iranian 
Revolutionary Guard Corps--and its affiliates, which are increasingly 
seen to command vital sectors of the Iranian economy.
  The act also establishes a legal framework for States and local 
governments and a safe harbor for fund managers to divest their 
portfolios of foreign companies involved in Iran's energy sector. We 
have also created a system to address black market diversion of 
sensitive technologies to Iran through other countries.
  In order to accommodate the President's constitutional authorities in 
the conduct of foreign affairs, we have had to preserve the prior 
construct of waivers and exceptions to these sanctions throughout the 
act. We have tried, however, to give the President as narrow an opening 
as possible for diplomatic delays. Even though the window for delay 
remains slightly open, this legislation is a vast improvement over 
prior law, and ensures that the President must make a determination to 
impose sanctions or provide Congress with a timely and written 
rationale for any delays or waivers.
  During the conference process, the administration insisted that we 
include a so-called closely cooperating countries exemption. Such an 
exemption would spare a country and its firms from any public risk to 
reputation and imposition of sanctions because an exemption, as opposed 
to a waiver, allows the country in question to avoid the specter of an 
investigation altogether.
  Instead, an already existing waiver for countries that cooperate with 
the United States in multilateral efforts to prevent Iran from 
acquiring nuclear weapons technology was modified to give a country and 
its firms, on a case-by-case basis, more time to cure their behavior.
  This waiver for cooperation can only be used, however, after the 
President first initiates an investigation, makes his determination 
whether sanctionable activity exists, and then certifies to Congress 
who would get the waiver. He must then explain exactly what actions 
that particular government is taking to cooperate with multilateral 
efforts and why the waiver is ``vital to the national security 
interests of the United States.''
  Once enacted, this law will allow the Treasury Department to put key 
companies and countries on notice that the clock is running, 
investigations are to begin immediately, and there is little room to 
avoid determinations of potential violations. In other words, there is 
no place left to hide.
  Once again, nothing that we have done in this conference report will 
curb Iran's nuclear ambitions. But, targeting Iran's oil and gas 
sectors will certainly raise the stakes for Iran's leaders, perhaps 
enough for them to consider confining their nuclear ambitions to 
peaceful uses.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to express my support for 
the conference report on the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act.
  This conference report expands sanctions authorized by the Iranian 
Sanctions Act of 1996 to foreign companies who sell Iran refined 
petroleum, support Iran's domestic refining capacity or sell Iran 
goods, services, or know-how that assist it in developing its energy 
sector; bans U.S. banks from engaging in financial transactions with 
foreign banks who do business with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards 
Corps or facilitate Iran's nuclear program and its support for 
terrorism; establishes three new sanctions the President may impose on 
violators of the Iranian Sanctions Act and requires the President to 
impose at least three of nine possible sanctions authorized by that 
act; bans U.S. government procurement contracts to companies that 
export technology to Iran that inhibits the free flow of information; 
and authorizes States and local governments to divest from companies 
involved in Iran's energy sector.
  The sanctions will terminate when the President certifies to Congress 
that Iran is no longer a state-sponsor of terrorism and has ceased 
efforts to acquire nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons and 
ballistic missiles and technology.
  Let me be clear: I am deeply concerned about Iran's uranium 
enrichment program and its refusal to abide by United Nations Security 
Council resolutions calling on Tehran to cease its activities and, once 
and for all, come clean about its nuclear program.
  A nuclear Iran would represent a serious threat to the security of 
the United States, Israel, and the international community.
  The question is, What is the best way to convince Iran to abandon its 
uranium enrichment program?
  During the previous administration, the United States sat on the 
sidelines and refused to talk to Iran.
  We let the United Kingdom, France, and Germany do the hard work of 
negotiating with Tehran as we remained silent.
  And it got us nowhere. Iran's uranium enrichment program accelerated 
and became more advanced.
  We had to try a different approach.
  I strongly supported the Obama administration's decision to break 
with this past and pursue a robust, diplomatic initiative with Iran.
  I am disappointed we have not made more progress. Indeed, Iran has 
taken steps in the wrong direction.
  A new, secret enrichment facility at Qom was uncovered.
  Iran refused to accept a U.S.-Russian proposal to ship its low 
enriched uranium to Russia and France for further processing for 
medical isotopes.
  And it continues to drag its feet on revealing to the International 
Atomic Energy Agency the full extent of its nuclear program.
  But the commitment this administration made to diplomacy gave us the 
leverage we needed to secure the backing for a fourth round of 
sanctions at the United Nations Security Council.
  There was no question that China and Russia were skeptical about 
additional sanctions.
  Securing their support and maintaining the support of our allies 
required principled, sustained, and deft diplomacy and I congratulate 
the administration for its success.
  Yet I recognize that the U.N. resolution could have been stronger and 
that unilateral action, such as the sanctions included in this 
legislation, will complement the U.N. efforts.
  And that is why I support passage of this legislation.
  Nevertheless, I believe it is critical for the United States to 
continue to pursue the diplomacy track.
  We must develop a ``Plan B'' to deal with the possibility that Iran's 
nuclear ambitions progress.
  Iran has been able to withstand previous sanctions initiatives and 
there is no guarantee that this latest round will be more effective.
  We know that China and Russia are unlikely to support tougher 
measures at this time.
  Military action is not a ``Plan B''. A strike would likely only 
delay, not destroy, Iran's nuclear program and lead to more violence 
and instability in the region.
  In my view, we must use the passage of the latest U.N. Security 
Council resolution and passage of this legislation as an opportunity to 
reach out to Tehran again on a fresh diplomatic initiative, not just on 
the nuclear program but on other issues where we can find some level of 
common ground and avenues of cooperation.
  Two months ago I had lunch with Iran's ambassador to the United 
Nations, Mohammad Khazaee, and I was struck by the lack of trust and 
understanding between our two countries.
  If we can find ways to build that trust, we may be able to secure 
progress on the most intractable issues.
  As chair of the Caucus on International Narcotics Control, I strongly 
suggest that cooperation on counternarcotics efforts is a good place to 
start.
  For example, Iran has suffered greatly from the influx of Afghan 
opium:

[[Page S5403]]

based on U.N. Office of Drugs and Crime annual assessments, 
approximately 140 tons of Afghan heroin enter Iran each year from 
Afghanistan--105 tons--and from Pakistan--35 tons; the estimated heroin 
user population in Iran is around 400,000 individuals, consuming, at a 
rate of about 35 grams per year, almost 14 tons of heroin annually; 
drug trafficking is considered such a major security threat that the 
government has spent over US$600 million to dig ditches, build barriers 
and install barbed wire to stop well-armed drug convoys from entering 
the country; and more than 3,500 Iranian border guards have been killed 
in the past three decades by drug traffickers.
  Given that the Iranian drug use epidemic is providing funding for the 
insurgency in Afghanistan, it seems logical to begin a cooperative 
dialogue with Iran on this area of mutual concern to build trust 
between both sides and promote progress on other matters, particularly 
Iran's nuclear program.
  I am hopeful that the passage of this legislation will not cease 
efforts on a diplomatic solution, but open the door to finding new ways 
to build trust and understanding between Iran and the international 
community.
  There is no guarantee that we will be successful in convincing Iran 
to suspend its uranium enrichment program but we have to explore every 
possible avenue.
  I firmly believe that we can still find a solution and work out our 
differences.
  I am hopeful that this legislation will bring us closer to that goal.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of this 
conference report for robust sanctions against Iran. I was proud to 
serve with, among others of my colleagues, Senator Dodd, on the 
conference committee. I want to recognize the hard work he has done to 
create a strong sanctions bill.
  These sanctions, I believe, will deter the threat Iran poses to U.S. 
national security because of its suspected nuclear weapons program. A 
country that has huge oil reserves clearly does not need nuclear power 
for nuclear energy. Therefore, the difference between its stated goals 
and its actions creates, I believe, a threat to the national security 
of the United States.
  I have been eager for today's vote. During the process of the 
conference committee, I have advocated for the strongest sanctions 
possible.
  I believe deeply that we must apply maximum pressure to the Iranian 
regime, that it is a growing threat to the region, the world, and a 
threat to its own people. In my view, tightening the screws on the 
Iranian regime genuinely advances the cause of stability and peace in 
the Middle East as well as our own national security. These sanctions 
are an essential means to that end.
  I have seen what the United Nations has done, and I am glad we got 
some multilateral response. But, in my view, they are not strong 
enough. That is why I think it is essential that we continue to lead 
many of our allies, who will be more robust in their actions if we pass 
this legislation today.
  In my view, it is essential that we freeze the assets of Iranian 
officials who have supported terrorism--with this legislation we will 
do that--that we impose sanctions against companies that engage in oil-
related business with the Iranian regime--and with this legislation we 
will do that--that we monitor Iran's usage of energy-related resources 
other than refined petroleum, especially ethanol, to ensure Iran is not 
allowed to replace its current petroleum needs with ethanol which 
would, in essence, severely undercut the intent behind these sanctions. 
So I am glad we have pushed for language that will follow that.
  We need the ban on trade with Iran to be strong, to be significant, 
and to be airtight. We need to press the Iranian Government to respect 
its citizens' human rights and freedoms, to identify Iranian officials 
responsible for violating those rights and impose financial penalties 
and travel restrictions on these human rights abusers.
  We need to prohibit the U.S. Government from contracting with those 
companies that export communication-jamming or monitoring technology to 
Iran. We simply cannot allow the regime to restrict communications 
between Iranians and between Iran and the outside world as happened 
during the postelection protests.
  We clearly see there is a desire among the average Iranians to be 
able to change the nature of their lives. We saw those willing to risk 
their freedom, willing to risk their lives. We cannot have the U.S. 
Government contracting with those companies that export communication-
jamming or monitoring technology to Iran that in essence allows the 
regime to do exactly that.
  We need to ban trade with Iran with exceptions for the export of 
food, medicines, humanitarian aid, and the exchange of informational 
materials.
  There is something I included in the Senate bill before it went to 
conference, and I am glad to see it is largely still in the legislation 
we will vote on today. We needed targeted sanctions against the Iranian 
Revolutionary Guard Corps, its supporters and affiliates, and any 
foreign governments that provide the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps 
with support.
  I am pleased to see this report will ban U.S. banks from engaging in 
financial transactions with foreign banks that do business with the 
Revolutionary Guard or facilitate Iran's illicit nuclear program. The 
Revolutionary Guard has now spread like a cancer throughout Iranian 
society, and it is involved in almost everything in Iran. We need to 
specifically target the IRGC, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, 
and this legislation does that.
  The robust sanctions against the Iranian regime that I will vote for 
today, and that I helped fashion, are a positive and necessary step to 
increase pressure on Iran so the regime fully understands the world 
will not only not tolerate its deceit and deception any longer, but it 
cannot tolerate its march to nuclear power and ultimately nuclear 
weapons. I will vote for these sanctions because they are robust, 
because they are in our national security interests and in the 
interests of the region and the world.
  I hope my colleagues, on a strong bipartisan basis, will join in 
casting similar votes because when we do, we send a message, No. 1, to 
the administration that there is, I hope, near unanimous support for 
the type of sanctions we are advocating that strengthens the hand of 
the President as he deals with other countries in the world, as he 
deals in the international forum, and it sends a clear message to 
Ahmadinejad that the United States is serious about stopping its march 
to nuclear weaponry.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I rise today to share my concerns as 
well about Iran and to express my support for tough sanctions against 
Iran. Iran poses a threat to the United States as well as to the 
international community. It continues to support terrorist 
organizations around the world, including Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran has 
also called for the destruction of the democratic State of Israel. 
These actions illustrate Iran's destructive intentions.
  Iran continues to pursue nuclear capabilities. While Iran claims its 
nuclear programs are intended for civilian use only, this is very 
difficult to believe. In fact, reports from the International Atomic 
Energy Agency of February of 2008 and May of 2010 question Iran's claim 
of pursuing nuclear capabilities for purely peaceful purposes. Nuclear 
capabilities and proper management of these capabilities is a serious 
responsibility. Iran has neither earned the right nor the trust for 
this nuclear responsibility.
  Iran continues to develop its nuclear programs without giving the 
International Atomic Energy Agency sufficient access, access to and 
information regarding its nuclear program. I understand the need for 
energy and the complexities surrounding the dual use nature of nuclear 
technology. However, Iran placed itself under obligations to the 
international community and agreed to comply with international 
safeguards and inspections.
  Iran has not fulfilled its commitments. It has not fulfilled its 
commitment to be transparent with the International Atomic Energy 
Agency or to maintain obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation 
Treaty.
  Iran does not want to join the international community efforts on 
curbing

[[Page S5404]]

the development of nuclear weapons. I believe without serious 
consequences for the proliferation activities there is little if any 
incentive for Iran or any other country considering nuclear weapon-
related activities to refrain from doing so. So I believe it is 
imperative that the United States work to increase comprehensive 
economic sanctions on Iran.
  The United States and the international community continue to 
threaten Iran with more sanctions. On June 9, the U.N. Security Council 
adopted resolution 1929. This represents the fourth round of sanctions 
against Iran from the international community. It is past time that 
this Congress act, act to put teeth into our threats of additional 
sanctions. I believe it is time today to implement economic sanctions 
to the full extent possible.
  Iran's leaders must be forced to realize that while they may be able 
to survive political isolation, they cannot ignore the adverse 
consequences to their ability to function in a global economy.
  I believe the status quo is not working in our dealings with Iran. I 
do not believe Iran is a country that we can quietly watch and hope 
that nothing serious is happening behind closed doors. Terrorism does 
not allow anyone to do so. It is time to act, and I call upon this 
Congress to support economic sanctions against Iran.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BARRASSO. I ask unanimous consent that the time in the quorum 
call be equally divided between both sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BARRASSO. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GRAHAM. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum 
call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I think I have 10 minutes. Is that right? 
Would the Chair advise me when 10 minutes expires?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will do so.
  Mr. GRAHAM. I take the floor today in support of the conference 
report that has been agreed to by the conferees regarding Iran 
sanctions. I wish to compliment Senators Dodd, Shelby, Lugar, Kerry, 
Lieberman and others who were involved in negotiating this compromise.
  The Iranian sanctions bill will give the President tools he does not 
have today that will allow us as a nation to be more forceful when it 
comes to trying to alter Iranian behavior. I think most people in this 
body see the Iranian regime up to no good, that the Iranian regime has 
been oppressing its own people, and they present a great threat in 
terms of the region and the world at large. They are one of the 
greatest sponsors of terrorism of any nation in the world. This 
sanctions legislation, which is bipartisan, will allow the President 
more tools. It will prevent access to foreign exchange in the United 
States. It will prevent access to our banking system by people who do 
business with Iran in unhealthy ways, and it will prevent the purchase 
of property in the United States in case the Iranians are looking for a 
place to put their money. We are going to take our banks and our real 
estate off the table so they cannot use us to profit from their brutal 
behavior.
  It gives the ability to the President to waive these sanctions when 
it comes to countries that are cooperating with us. The whole goal of 
this legislation is to empower the administration and our Nation with 
tools that would create a downside for the Iranian Government to 
continue to try to develop a nuclear weapon and support terrorist 
organizations.
  I am hopeful this will have some deterrent effect. The United Nations 
is beginning to act. The European Union, Russia, and China seem to be 
more helpful to the Obama administration. Anything we can do to help, 
we will. The idea of trying to get Iran to change its behavior through 
internal cooperation is a worthy idea to pursue. I hope it works.
  Senator Schumer and I offered legislation not long ago that would 
prohibit companies that do business with the Iranian regime in the area 
empowering the regime in terms of technology to interfere with the 
Internet and stop the people of Iran from communicating with each 
other. That made it into the bill. I want to thank the conferees. What 
Senator Schumer and I came up with months ago, right after the massacre 
of the students by the Iranian regime, one of the things that led to 
this people's revolt in Iran, was the ability to Tweeter and talk to 
each other, use the Internet. The Iranian regime has been trying to 
suppress the ability of the Iranian people to talk to each other, and 
we created legislation that told the international community: Any 
company that empowers this regime to suppress the free flow of 
information among the Iranian people would lose business when it came 
to American business. That made it in the bill. I hope that will help.
  The Iranian people have had a very difficult time. The election, as 
seen by the Iranian people and the world at large, of Ahmadinejad has 
been, quite frankly, a fraud and a joke. About a year ago, a little 
over a year ago, a young lady captured international attention and the 
hearts and minds of the world--I think her name was Neda--who was 
killed in the streets of Tehran. She was a beautiful young girl who had 
taken to the streets to try to defy this regime's oppressive behavior.
  So as we look at the world here in the middle of June regarding Iran, 
there is a lot of hope I have that the Iranian people have turned the 
corner in terms of what they want for their future. We need to be their 
partner in a constructive way. It is one thing to empower the people, 
it is another thing to empower the regime that oppresses the people. 
Some of the sanctions we are proposing would make life difficult for 
the every-day Iranian, but I think they would welcome that, if it would 
give them the ability to weaken the regime they no longer tolerate or 
support.
  The sanctions route with Russia and China has potential. If the world 
will speak with one voice and support President Obama in terms of 
making the consequences that the Iranian nuclear program is a support 
of terrorism unacceptable economically, including refined petroleum 
products, it would be good for the world at large.
  Our friends in Israel are very concerned, as they should be, about 
the way Iran is moving toward supporting Hezbollah and Hamas and other 
organizations that are bent on the destruction of Israel. A nuclear 
weapon in the hands of this regime would be a nightmare for the world 
at large, but it would be horrible for the State of Israel. It is my 
hope we can avoid that. I hope sanctions work. However, the world must 
understand that sanctions is a tool to change behavior. It is worthy of 
our time to try to change behavior with these sanctions.
  What is unacceptable is to practice a policy of containment, to 
accept a nuclear-armed Iran and hope that we contain it. To me that is 
a folly. That is a scenario that would lead to the unthinkable. If Iran 
ever does acquire a nuclear weapon, you are not going to contain it. 
You are going to have a Mideast where other people want a nuclear 
weapon to hedge their bets against Iran. You will have a world where a 
regime has a nuclear weapon and could be no better friend of the 
terrorists than Iran. I think President Clinton, when I was in Israel 
with him, spoke well of this.
  He talked about his biggest fear if Iran got a nuclear weapon. It 
would not be so much an attack against Israel or our allies as would be 
it falling into the hands of a terrorist organization that would use it 
against Israel or our allies. I think President Clinton is correct in 
being worried about that.
  So this is a good day. We cannot agree on much here in Congress. We 
are in a pretty partisan environment right now. I hope that will pass 
one day. But when it comes to Iranian sanctions, we

[[Page S5405]]

came together as a body. We are giving tools to the administration to 
hopefully change the behavior of this regime. I am proud of our 
colleagues who negotiated this deal with the House. I am hopeful it 
will help.
  I will conclude with one final thought: Whatever tools it takes to 
change the behavior of the Iranian Government we need to keep on the 
table, and the best tool is a peaceful tool. But if military force is 
ever required to change Iranian behavior, I hope that will be at least 
considered as the last option, not the first option. I hope we never go 
down that road. But it may be a road you have to explore if all this 
fails.
  I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. RISCH. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call 
be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the quorum 
calls be equally divided between both sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. RISCH. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. KYL. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call 
be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Burris). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I wish to speak on the Iran sanctions 
conference report which I assume we will be approving in a matter of a 
few minutes. This is a very important event in the Congress and could 
play a very significant role in the history of our country. I support 
the conference report. It is designated as H.R. 2194. I reiterate, I 
believe it is crucial that the Senate approve the conference report and 
that the President sign it into law as soon as possible. I fully 
predict both of those things will occur.
  Let me mention three of the most important provisions of the bill so 
we know what it does. It deals with sanctions against Iran. There are 
two reasons: No. 1, to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear 
capability, and No. 2, to support the aspirations of the people of Iran 
for a more representative government.
  What the bill does first is to expand the scope of existing sanctions 
against companies that invest in Iran's energy sector, and it includes 
measures to punish firms that export gasoline to Iran. We would think a 
country such as Iran would have plenty of gasoline, but they do not 
have refinery capacity to create the finished product which their 
people must use. So something on the order of at least 40 percent of 
their gasoline has to be imported. Because of this heavy dependence on 
imported gasoline, it is vulnerable to outside pressure, and that is 
why this particular sanction is an important step. By putting a squeeze 
on Iran's gas supplies and dissuading energy firms from investing in 
the country, we can hopefully force the Iranian regime to make 
difficult decisions about its finances, thereby further increasing its 
unpopularity.
  Second, the bill limits nuclear cooperation agreements between the 
United States and countries which sell illicit materials to Iran. It 
also limits licenses under any such current agreements. A country that 
allows its citizens or companies to provide equipment or technologies 
or materials to Iran that make a material contribution to its nuclear 
capabilities should not benefit from nuclear cooperation with the 
United States, and we make it clear that won't be permitted under this 
provision.
  The third thing the bill does is it includes the so-called McCain 
language that requires the President to compile a list of Iranian 
officials, specific people who have brutalized the Iranian people, and 
to impose sanctions against those particular individuals identified as 
human rights violators. The administration can use the new authority it 
is given in this legislation to publicly identify those people in the 
Iranian Government who are actually responsible for perpetrating human 
rights violations in Iran since the fraudulent elections in June of 
2009. It can hold these people accountable through these targeted 
sanctions. The measure also requires that such persons be subject to 
restrictions on financial and property transactions. It also makes such 
persons ineligible for U.S. visas.
  We can see there is a broad array of targeted kinds of sanctions 
that, combined, could have a significant impact on our policy with 
Iran.
  While I am pleased that the conferees concluded their work and the 
legislation is here on the floor, I do wish to note in passing that it 
is long overdue. At the request of the administration, Congress has 
repeatedly delayed action on bilateral sanctions legislation. Because 
sanctions take time to work, we have given up some time here.
  In some respects, we have wasted too much time waiting for the United 
Nations to finally act, as it eventually did earlier this month. The 
U.N. Security Council resolution, however, will do very little to slow 
down or stop Iran's nuclear weapons program or even prevent its support 
for terrorism around the world. Its provisions--the bulk of them--are 
voluntary. They don't deal with Iran's energy sector. This is primarily 
because of the demand of the Chinese Government. It also excludes 
Russia's cooperation with Iran on the Bushehr powerplant as well as the 
sale by Russia of the S-300 missile system to Iran, a very modern and 
effective anti-aircraft system which could certainly play a role in 
defending Iran against an attack on its nuclear facilities.
  In addition, the divided vote of the Security Council displays to 
Iran that the world is not united in dealing with its illicit conduct. 
In fact, I argue that, in a way, we are in a worse position than we 
were 18 months ago when the President started his diplomacy in dealing 
with Iran. Up to then, all of the resolutions that had been passed 
against Iran had been unanimous. This one was not unanimous. In some 
respects, we have lost ground.
  It is clear that the President's effort to get the Iranian regime to 
negotiate for that 18-month period did not achieve anything except 
allow the Iranians more time to develop their weaponry. The U.S. 
sanctions resolution is not going to be very effective in going any 
further than that, in my view, nor will the European Union add much to 
the U.N. resolution, although they will add something.
  Before I conclude, let me ponder for a second a question others have 
asked, which is, How important is it that we do everything we can to 
prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon? What would happen if it 
did acquire a nuclear weapon? What would be the big deal?
  Imagine a world in which Iran does have a nuclear weapon. Lay aside 
the fact that we have a picture of the Iranian leader, Ahmadinejad, 
with a nuclear weapon and just imagine what he would do with that. 
Would it really be possible to contain a nuclear Iran using 
conventional deterrence mechanisms?
  Some would say: We lived with a nuclear-armed Soviet Union for four 
decades. It worked with Moscow; why would it not work with Tehran? To 
some extent, it depends on the definition of ``work.'' Will it work?
  Remember that while the Soviets never actually used their nuclear 
weapons, the fact that they possessed the weapons made a big difference 
in political events over those 40 years. It allowed them to subjugate 
Eastern Europe, and we had no way of responding. Had we tried to 
respond, there was the nuclear threat against us. It allowed them to 
foment a Communist revolution around the world and to sponsor a range 
of international terrorist groups during this period of time. When the 
Soviets invaded Hungary in 1956 in order to crush a democratic 
uprising, they knew the risk of a nuclear exchange would prevent the 
United States from responding with military force. I remember at that 
time the disappointment of the Hungarians who thought the United States 
had led them to think we would be supportive. In effect, there was 
nothing we could do that wouldn't potentially provoke a nuclear attack 
by Russia, and nobody wanted that. In other words, Moscow's nuclear 
arsenal served as the ultimate deterrent. It allowed the Kremlin to

[[Page S5406]]

undermine U.S. interests across the globe without fear of an American 
reprisal. The Soviets didn't need to use their nuclear weapons in order 
to achieve results; the mere fact that it had nuclear weapons 
dramatically increased both its strategic power and its leverage over 
foreign policy and, to some extent, over the United States.

  The same would be true if Iran acquired nuclear weapons. Even if the 
mullahs never actually detonated a nuclear bomb, their acquisition of a 
nuclear capability would forever change Iran's regional and global 
influence, and it would certainly forever change the Middle East. If 
Iran went nuclear, its neighbors--thinking particularly of Egypt, Saudi 
Arabia, and Turkey--might feel compelled to pursue their own nuclear 
arsenals. Tehran could easily trigger a dangerous chain reaction of 
nuclear proliferation. Once they had nuclear weapons, the Iranians 
would be much more aggressive in supporting terrorist organizations 
that are killing even American troops, for example, in Iraq. The 
Iranians would also ramp up their support for Hezbollah and Hamas and 
possibly provide them with nuclear materials. They would be emboldened 
to conduct economic warfare against the West, for example, by 
disrupting oil shipments traveling through the Straits of Hormuz. Iran 
would also be more confident about expanding its footprint in Latin 
America, where it has established a close working relationship with 
Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez. Governments around the world would 
lose faith in America's reliability as a strategic partner. U.S. 
credibility would be irrevocably weakened.
  Remember, this is not the worst-case scenario. We are assuming that a 
self-preservation instinct would dissuade the Iranians from ever 
launching nuclear weapons against our allies or even the United States. 
But then again, is this really a safe assumption? Iranian leader 
Ahmadinejad has repeatedly expressed his desire to destroy the State of 
Israel, and given his radical, millenarian religious views and the 
viciously anti-Semitic ideology espoused by the Iranian theocracy, we 
can't simply dismiss the idea that Iran would attack Israel with 
nuclear weapons.
  Because the United Nations took so long to act and because its 
sanctions are relatively weak, there is also the possibility, as the 
Jerusalem Post pointed out in an article entitled ``Too Little, Too 
Very Late,'' that U.N. sanctions could lull the international community 
into a false sense of security. That is where the action we take today 
could really help.
  Here is what the Post wrote:

       Breaking and evading these sanctions--

  Talking about the U.S. sanctions--

     ought to be a breeze for Ahmadinejad. A full year after 
     Iran's deceptive elections, which spurred countrywide 
     demonstrations, he may be less popular but his position is 
     stable. After the regime brutally quashed his opposition, it 
     is very doubtful that stunted sanctions will destabilize his 
     hold on power. . . . [The U.N.] sanctions . . . are not the 
     antidote to the Iranian nuclear threat that Israel had hoped 
     for and that the free world so badly needs. In some ways, 
     they may even exacerbate Israel's predicament. They will lend 
     the appearance of an international mobilization to curb 
     Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions, but in actuality will 
     achieve nothing--the worst of all worlds.

  That is why I think the United States separate sanctions authorized 
by the legislation we will vote on shortly are so important to come in 
behind the United Nations sanctions and what the European Union might 
do to supplement those actions in a way that will truly be meaningful.
  Finally, I want to note something that, frankly, is as important as 
everything else I have said and should be seen as part and parcel to 
our action in adopting this sanctions legislation. It has nothing to do 
with nuclear weapons, but it has everything to do with human rights. We 
need to make it very clear to the Iranian people that we care about 
them, we care about their aspirations for more freedom, for more 
representative government, and for the ability to take advantage of the 
opportunities their country should be presenting for them.
  We can help the people of Iran achieve those aspirations by putting 
pressure on the people who prevent that from occurring, the regime in 
Tehran, the mullah-led government. These sanctions can have an impact 
on those mullahs and, in turn, help the Iranian people achieve their 
goals.
  We need to be lending moral and rhetorical support to the Iranian 
activists. These are the people who poured into the streets last summer 
in protest of a fraudulent election. Just as we championed the cause of 
Soviet and Eastern European dissidents during the Cold War, I believe 
we should promote the efforts of Iranian freedom fighters and, frankly, 
shine a spotlight on the regime's brutal repression. That can be done 
especially through the McCain provisions that are part of the Iran 
sanctions legislation we are considering.
  Had the United Nations imposed strong sanctions on Iran a long time 
ago when it was first found to be in violation of the Nuclear Non-
Proliferation Treaty, I would be more optimistic about our chances of 
success. Iran's economy would have been under severe strain for an 
extended period, and the government would have had fewer resources to 
fund its nuclear program and less power to repress its people.
  As I said, there is still time, and because we are able to approve 
this conference report today and send it to the President for his 
signature, we are able to add to the sanctions that the rest of the 
world is willing to impose in such a way as to not only have an 
opportunity to dissuade the Iranian leaders from pursuing their nuclear 
program but, as I said, just as importantly, to demonstrate to the 
Iranian people we aim to support them in their quest for greater 
freedom.
  So I hope my colleagues will send a very strong message with a 
unanimous vote for the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, 
and Divestment Act of 2009. I hope the President will sign this 
legislation immediately and begin to implement its provisions.
  Mr. President, there is a long list of folks to thank: 
Representatives Berman and Harman and Cantor in the House of 
Representatives are just some who come to mind; Senator Lieberman and 
Senator Bayh, colleagues in the Senate; the leaders, Leader Reid and 
Leader McConnell, who have worked to bring this report to us for a vote 
today in an expedited way. I think this is a very good example of 
cooperation both between the House and the Senate and between Democrats 
and Republicans to accomplish something that is not just good for the 
people of the United States of America but people around the world--in 
the Middle East, and in particular the people of Iran.
  So I urge my colleagues to unanimously support the conference report 
when we have an opportunity to vote on it shortly.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the 
conference report for the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act.
  First, I would like to commend Senator Dodd for putting forth a 
comprehensive plan to arm the administration with the tools they need 
to put a stop to Iran's rogue nuclear program.
  I believe when it comes to Iran, we should never take the military 
option off the table. But I have long argued that economic sanctions 
are the preferred and probably the most effective way to choke Iran's 
nuclear ambitions.
  The Obama administration initiated direct diplomatic negotiations 
with Iran, but that government, led by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, 
stubbornly refused to suspend their nuclear program despite President 
Obama's genuine attempts at diplomacy.
  Iran's nuclear weapons program represents a severe threat to American 
national interests because their acquisition of nuclear weapons could 
lead to the proliferation of nuclear weapons throughout the Middle East 
and beyond, ending any hopes for a nuclear weapons-free world.
  Make no mistake, a nuclear Iran would be destabilizing to its 
neighbors, encourage terrorism against the United States and Israel, 
and the risk of both conventional and nuclear war in the Middle East 
would rise considerably.

[[Page S5407]]

  President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has already threatened to ``wipe Israel 
off the map,'' so we know for a fact that a nuclear Iran would pose a 
potential threat to our closest ally in the region, the State of 
Israel.
  These tough new sanctions have such overwhelming support because 
Members of the House and Senate, Democrat and Republican, are united in 
doing what is necessary to stop Iran's drive to obtain a nuclear 
weapons capability.
  It will also impose sanctions on financial institutions doing 
business with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or with certain 
Iranian banks blacklisted by the Department of Treasury.
  The bill sanctions companies that export gasoline to Iran. This is 
one of the few pressure points where we can act unilaterally and have a 
real effect. The world knows Iran does not currently have the refining 
capacity to meet its domestic gasoline needs and is dependent on 
imported gasoline. So now is the time to reduce Iran's energy supply if 
it fails to suspend its nuclear enrichment program.
  I am also glad we will be strengthening export controls to stop the 
illegal export of sensitive technology to Iran. During the recent 
Iranian elections, we witnessed the Iranian regime go so far as to 
block the Internet and mobile phone communications of their own 
citizens.
  That is why Senator Lindsey Graham and I introduced the Reduce 
Iranian Cyber Suppression Act, or RICA, a bipartisan bill that would 
bar companies that export sensitive communications technology to Iran 
from applying for or renewing procurement contracts with the U.S. 
Government. I am pleased these provisions have been preserved in the 
conference.
  I also applaud the conferees for not carving out companies from 
countries that are U.S. allies. There must be one standard when it 
comes to punishing companies that continue to invest in Iran.
  So, in conclusion, Chairman Dodd has done an excellent job crafting a 
comprehensive plan to arm the administration with the tools it needs to 
put a stop to Iran's rogue nuclear program. I strongly urge my 
colleagues to support this plan, and I look forward to the President 
signing this important legislation. It is a tremendous accomplishment 
for Congress, and it is going to go a long way to address the real 
security threat that Iran poses to the United States and our world.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the 
comprehensive Iran Sanctions Accountability and Divestment Act of 2010. 
I wish to particularly thank my colleagues on the Banking Committee for 
working to bring this conference report to the floor.
  I have said many times before that we don't have a moment to waste 
when it comes to Iran. We must focus like a laser beam on Iran's 
dangerous refusal to cease uranium enrichment in defiance of the 
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and multiple United Nations Security 
Council resolutions, because we know that Iran could not only use any 
weapons it acquires, but it could proliferate nuclear material and 
technologies to terrorist groups and rogue regimes around the world. We 
must act today. Iran is a threat to the security of the United States, 
the Middle East, and the rest of the globe.
  Let me list a few of the many important provisions of this bill. 
First, it would specifically target companies involved in refined 
petroleum sales to Iran and those who are supporting Iran's domestic 
refining efforts. This is critical, because countless experts have told 
us that the way to pressure Iran is to target its oil and gas sectors. 
I have believed this for a long time, and I have been pushing for this 
bill for a long time.
  According to the Government Accountability Office:

       In recent years, oil export revenues have accounted for 24 
     percent of Iran's gross domestic product and between 50 and 
     76 percent of the Iranian government's revenues.

  So we need to go after their revenues, because they are being used to 
push forward their nuclear program, which is so dangerous. We have to 
take away those resources, and this sanctions bill is a very good way 
to do that.
  Second, this bill would also prohibit U.S. banks from engaging in 
transactions with foreign financial institutions that continue to do 
business with Iranian banks and Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard 
Corps. I think Chairman Dodd and Chairman Berman captured best what 
this provision means:

       Cease your activities or be denied critical access to 
     America's financial system.

  Third, the bill would also place significant penalties on Iran's 
human rights abusers. I don't think I have to explain why this is 
essential. Like many of my colleagues, I have watched human rights 
violations inside of Iran, including the brutal suppression of the 
opposition ``Green Movement'' that has sought to have its voice heard.
  Fourth, I am especially pleased that the bill includes a provision 
requiring companies bidding on a U.S. Government procurement contract 
to certify that they are not engaged in sanctionable conduct. This is 
so important, because a recent GAO study found that the U.S. Government 
awarded $880 million to seven companies between fiscal years 2005 and 
2009 that were also doing business in Iran's energy sector. Taxpayer 
dollars from hard-working Americans must never be used to purchase 
goods or supplies from companies who are working to develop Iran's 
energy sector or who are engaged in any behavior that is prohibited by 
sanctions.
  Finally, this bill codifies in law longstanding Executive orders that 
prohibit American companies from doing business in Iran. American 
firms, including through their subsidiaries, must never be allowed to 
value a quick profit over the national security of America.
  I know we are going to pass this conference report today, and I know 
it will have strong support in the Senate. But what we must do next is 
be vigilant in ensuring that the new sanctions created by this bill are 
enforced to the fullest extent possible. I asked the administration if 
they are ready to enforce this law should it pass, and they said 
absolutely.
  The situation is grave. We must send a clear and resounding message 
to Iran that it will pay a very heavy price for its continued defiance 
of international law and its reckless behavior which, again, threatens 
the Middle East and threatens the entire world.
  So I am looking forward to voting for this and making sure as a 
member of the Foreign Relations Committee that this sanctions act is 
enforced.
  Thank you very much.
  I yield the floor and I note the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, the world has watched as Iran has oppressed 
its own people, violated United Nations resolutions, challenged 
America, and threatened Israel.
  The Senate is taking an important step forward today as we pass the 
conference report that will impose tough new sanctions on Iran. We are 
passing these sanctions because we believe we must stop Iran from 
developing a nuclear weapon--a weapon that would surely threaten the 
national security of the United States and Israel. Our goal is to 
target Iran where it would hurt the regime the most. These new economic 
sanctions are related to Iran's refined petroleum sector and 
international financial institutions that do business with Iran's 
Islamic Revolutionary Guard and Iranian banks.
  The Senate has worked hard to pass this legislation. I thank Senator 
Dodd, who worked tirelessly with Senator Kerry and the other conferees 
to get the final version of the bill completed. I also thank a man who 
came to the House of Representatives with me years ago, Howard Berman, 
chairman

[[Page S5408]]

of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who led the effort on the other 
side of the Capitol.
  Once these sanctions become law, they will expand the multilateral 
sanctions passed by the United Nations and the new sanctions the 
European Union is discussing.
  The Senate has a critical role to play by taking clear and decisive 
action to get the Iranian regime to change its behavior, and we have 
done that with passage of this conference report. I look forward to its 
passing later today.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader is recognized.
  Mr. REID. Will my friend withhold for a brief minute?
  Mr. McCONNELL. Yes.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following the 
remarks of the Republican leader, the Senate vote on adoption of the 
conference report to accompany H.R. 2194, the Iran Refined Petroleum 
Sanctions Act, with the previous order remaining in effect; provided 
further that upon conclusion of the vote, the following Senators be 
recognized to speak or engage in colloquies: Senators Cornyn and 
Bingaman for a total of 10 minutes, Senator Dorgan for up to 15 
minutes, and Senators Murray and Bond for up to 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Republican leader is recognized.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I rise to briefly comment on the Iran 
sanctions conference report, which we will be voting on shortly.
  I am pleased with the bill before the Senate, as I have been urging 
enactment of this legislation for some time. I brought it up with the 
President on numerous occasions over the last 6 to 8 months. I 
cosponsored it in the last Congress and in the current one.
  Congress has been slow to act as the Iranian program to enrich 
uranium has progressed.
  Iran has also taken advantage of the delay to blunt the impact of 
this measure.
  Just today a headline in the Washington Post read that ``Iran is 
prepared for fuel sanctions.''
  But this legislation should be viewed as only a part of a broader, 
comprehensive effort by the U.S. to harness the various means of 
national power to ensure that Iran does not secure a nuclear weapon.
  As President Obama has stated, Iran's ``development of nuclear 
weapons would be unacceptable''.
  We must work with our allies in the gulf to make clear to Iran that 
the cost of developing a weapon exceed the prestige they think they 
would gain from acquiring this capability.
  First and foremost, the sanctions in this legislation need to be 
implemented and implemented quickly, not waived.
  The time for further delay is past.
  The collective strength of the recent U.N. Security Council 
resolution and this conference report must be combined to strike at 
Iranian shadow companies and the regime's leaders.
  The need for urgency should be obvious because the threat posed to 
the U.S. and its allies by the revolutionary Iranian regime is grave. 
Its president has called for Israel to be wiped off the map. An Iranian 
nuclear weapon threatens to set off an arms race in the Middle East, 
and embolden the regime in its support of terrorist groups.
  Passage of Iranian sanctions is an important first step, but only a 
first step.
  I agree with the President that the U.S. and our allies must make 
clear to Iran that the development of a nuclear weapon is unacceptable.
  That is why I urge passage of this conference report and all other 
necessary measures to deter the Iranian regime.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, please report the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the conference report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the 
     Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 2194) 
     to amend the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 to enhance United 
     States diplomatic efforts with respect to Iran and by 
     expanding economic sanctions against Iran, having met, have 
     agreed that the House recede from its disagreement to the 
     amendment of the Senate and agree to the same with an 
     amendment, and the Senate agree to the same. Signed by all of 
     the conferees on the part of both Houses.

  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, after consultation with the chairman of 
the House Budget Committee, and on behalf of both of us, I hereby 
submit this Statement of Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation for the 
conference report to H.R. 2194, the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, 
Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010. This statement has been 
prepared pursuant to section 4 of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 
2010, Public Law 111-139, and is being submitted for printing in the 
Congressional Record prior to passage by the Senate of the conference 
report to H.R. 2194.

       Total Budgetary Effects of H.R. 2194:
       2010-2015: $0.
       2010-2020: $0.
       Total Budgetary Effects of H.R. 2194 for the 5-year 
     Statutory PAYGO Scorecard: $0.
       Total Budgetary Effects of H.R. 2194 for the 10-year 
     Statutory PAYGO Scorecard: $0.

  Also submitted for the Record as part of this statement is a table 
prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, which provides additional 
information on the budgetary effects of this Act. I ask unanimous 
consent that it be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

 CBO ESTIMATE OF THE STATUTORY PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 2194, THE COMPREHENSIVE IRAN SANCTIONS, ACCOUNTABILITY,
                                             AND DIVESTMENT ACT OF 2010, AS PROVIDED TO CBO ON JUNE 23, 2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   2010     2011     2012     2013     2014     2015     2016     2017     2018     2019     2020   2010-2015  2010-2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Net Increase or Decrease (-) in the Deficit
 
Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Impact.        0        0        0        0        0        0        0        0        0        0        0         0         0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: H.R. 2194 would ban certain imports from Iran and impose sanctions on certain entities that conduct business with Iran. The act would reduce
  customs duties and impose civil penalties, but CBO estimates those effects would not be significant in any year.

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a 
sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to the conference report.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd) 
is necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 99, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 199 Leg.]

                                YEAS--99

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bennett
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Brown (MA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burris
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagan
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Johnson
     Kaufman
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     LeMieux
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lugar
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Thune
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Vitter

[[Page S5409]]


     Voinovich
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Byrd
       
  The conference report was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized.

                          ____________________