[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 128 (Tuesday, September 8, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6437-S6438]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            IRAN NUCLEAR AGREEMENT RESOLUTION OF DISAPPROVAL

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, today we will begin consideration of 
the resolution to disapprove the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action 
negotiated by China, France, Germany, the Russian Federation, the 
United Kingdom, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the United States. 
This resolution seeks to constrain Iran's nuclear weapons program. I 
will ask all Senators to be present in the Chamber beginning tomorrow 
afternoon to commence debate on this important issue.
  Let me extend my appreciation for the time and research many of our 
colleagues have given to understanding the details, the strengths, and 
the weaknesses of this agreement. For many, this has been a very 
difficult decision. For some, it was made even more difficult by 
assertions from the administration that the only choice was between 
this agreement and war. Of course, that was never, never true. All such 
political statements really say is that the administration lacks the 
will and the leadership to pursue a stronger agreement, additional 
sanctions, and policies intended to end Iran's enrichment program if it 
cannot attain congressional agreement on the President's deal with 
Iran.
  The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act passed the Senate by a vote of 
98 to 1 earlier this year. It provided each of us with the opportunity 
to truly represent our constituents on this important issue. I expect 
that every Senator who voted for that measure is now entitled to an up-
or-down vote--not a filibuster or artificial limits on passage but an 
important vote--on this resolution.
  Along with the Americans we were sent here to represent, countries, 
businesses, and proliferation networks seeking to expand ties with Iran 
stand to have a simple question answered. All of the people involved in 
this around the world deserve to have a simple question answered: Does 
the Senate disapprove of this deal with Iran? Does the Senate 
disapprove of this deal with Iran? The Senate should not hide behind 
procedural obfuscation to shield the President or our individual views.
  This debate should not be about a President who will leave office in 
16 months; it should be about where our country will be in 16 years.
  The Democratic leader said that his party strove to preserve the 
Corker-Cardin bill and that it was incumbent on Congress to review this 
agreement with the thoughtful, level-headed process this agreement 
deserves. I agree that is exactly what is needed right now. I know that 
is exactly what nearly every Senator in this body voted for. And I call 
on every Senator to resist attempts to obstruct a final vote and deny 
the American people and Congress the say they deserve on this extremely 
important matter.
  The facts have already led many of our Democratic colleagues--
including the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee in the 
Senate and the Foreign Affairs Committee in the House, as well as the 
likely next leader of the Democratic Party in the Senate--to come out 
in opposition to this agreement. Certainly those were not easy 
decisions for them. But these Democrats are joined in their skepticism 
by Americans of every political persuasion who believe this deal will 
make our country less safe--less safe.
  Even those lawmakers who have come out in favor of the President's 
agreement use terms such as ``deeply flawed'' to describe it. Let's 
remember why that is. The American people were led to believe that 
negotiations with Iran would be about ending its nuclear program, but 
that is not what the deal before us would do. We know the President's 
deal with Iran will not end its nuclear program but will instead leave 
Iran with a threshold nuclear capability recognized as legitimate by 
the international community--quite the opposite of the original goal. 
We know the President's deal with Iran will leave it with thousands of 
centrifuges, an advanced research and development program, and access 
to billions of dollars, at least some of which the President himself 
has acknowledged will be used to support terrorism. We know

[[Page S6438]]

the President's deal with Iran will allow it to further ballistic 
missile research and strengthen its economy. In short, by almost any 
measure, we know Iran will emerge stronger from this deal in nearly 
every aspect of its national power and better positioned to expand its 
sphere of influence.
  The Iranian nuclear program was never intended to produce nuclear 
energy for peaceful civilian purposes. That was never what they had in 
mind. Certainly Iran does not need an underground enrichment facility 
for those purposes or long-range ballistic missiles. Iran has employed 
every aspect of national power to defend the regime and the Islamic 
revolution to include support for terrorism, unconventional warfare, 
public diplomacy, cyber warfare, suppression of internal dissent, and, 
of course, support for proxies and terrorist groups.
  We already know Iran is undertaking many activities relevant to the 
development of a nuclear explosive device. As the International Atomic 
Energy Agency revealed in a November 2011 report, it has attempted to, 
No. 1, procure nuclear-related equipment and materials through 
individuals and entities related to the military; No. 2, develop 
pathways for the production of nuclear material; No. 3, acquire nuclear 
weapons development information and documentation from a clandestine 
nuclear supply network; and No. 4, develop an indigenous design of a 
nuclear weapon, as well as test components. All of that has been done, 
according to the IAEA.
  Moreover, as Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George Shultz 
recently observed:

       The final stages of the nuclear talks have coincided with 
     Iran's intensified efforts to expand and entrench its power 
     in neighboring states.

  They warned:

       Iranian or Iranian client forces are now the pre-eminent 
     military or political element in multiple Arab countries. 
     Unless political restraint is linked to nuclear restraint, an 
     agreement freeing Iran from sanctions risks empowering Iran's 
     hegemonic efforts.

  I will have more to say later in the week concerning my opposition to 
this agreement, and I expect every Senator will wish to explain his or 
her respective vote. But I would ask every Senator to keep this in mind 
as well: The President has said that ``no deal is better than a bad 
deal.'' And while he will be out of office in a few months, the rest of 
the country and the world will have to deal with the predictable 
consequences of the President's deal for far longer than the next year 
and a half.
  If lawmakers determine that this deal is indeed a bad one, then they 
have a duty to vote that way. We can work together to prepare suitable 
sanctions legislation and other measures required to maintain our 
capabilities to deal with the threat from Iran, but no matter what, we 
should conduct a respectful and serious debate that is consistent with 
the serious ramifications of this agreement.

                          ____________________