[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 130 (Thursday, September 10, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H5877-H5878]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 WHY THE IRAN AGREEMENT MUST BE OPPOSED

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Dold) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DOLD. Mr. Speaker, I want to just associate myself with the 
comments of my good friend from Kentucky, who was just up here and I 
think eloquently was giving a case as to why this deal with Iran is 
such a bad deal.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly believe that the national security 
consequences of the nuclear agreement with Iran will haunt America for 
generations if Congress does not step in to stop it. This shouldn't be 
about party. It should not be about loyalty to the President because, 
if one thinks about this current President, whether you like him or 
don't like him, whether you agree with him or don't agree with him, 
this administration ends in 15 months, but the national security 
consequences of this deal will go on and haunt America for generations 
to come.
  This deal, this agreement, needs to be evaluated on the substance and 
how it will impact America and will it make America safer.
  Mr. Speaker, an overwhelming bipartisan majority of Americans and a 
bipartisan majority of this Congress are against this agreement. It 
makes America less safe. If it survives, it is only because the 
President was able to ram it through on a wholly partisan basis. That 
is not something to celebrate, Mr. Speaker. The fact that there is zero 
bipartisan support for this pact in the United States Congress further 
demonstrates just how dangerous this is for our Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, in my very first speech on the floor of this House in 
2011, I stated my belief that Iran was the greatest national security 
threat that we had. Today, I am even more committed that Iran is the 
greatest threat that we have to our own national security.
  By proving that aggression and defiance will be rewarded, this 
agreement makes the world less safe and, tragically, war more likely. 
What are we saying to our neighbors? If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, 
surely its neighbors will go on a nuclear arms race as well and will 
make this dangerous part of the world even less safe than it already 
is, far more volatile.
  These concerns have been bipartisan. According to Democratic Senator 
Bob Menendez, this agreement doesn't end Iran's nuclear program, it 
preserves it. According to Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer: ``If 
Iran's true intent is to get a nuclear weapon, under this agreement, it 
must simply exercise patience.''
  Simply put, this agreement won't block Iran's path to a nuclear 
weapon. Instead, it leaves Iran's nuclear infrastructure intact and 
amounts to a containment strategy. Settling for only containing a 
nuclear Iran is a grave mistake that leaves the long-term safety of the 
United States and our allies vulnerable to nuclear blackmail by Iran.
  We are all familiar with the basic reasons for why this reckless 
agreement should be opposed. The agreement relies on a sure-to-fail 
inspections regime that falls well short of anytime, anywhere 
inspections that are so critically needed. It fails to deliver on the 
commitment to dismantle Iran's nuclear infrastructure.
  Iran actually receives a signing bonus that trades permanent 
sanctions relief for temporary limitations on its nuclear program. This 
will provide Iran, the world's greatest state sponsor of terror--and 
that is not up for debate; that is not disputed--with $150 billion, 
which they will no doubt use to fund terror through their proxies in 
Hezbollah and Hamas, through Assad in Syria, and through cells in South 
and Central America--sunset provisions, which simply gives Iran a 
patient path to a nuclear weapon.
  This agreement lifts conventional arms embargo in 5 years and 
ballistic missile embargo in 8 years. Why were these even on the table, 
Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker, I ask you: What do you use an 
intercontinental ballistic missile for? It is not to drop leaflets; it 
is not for humanitarian needs. It is to deliver a nuclear warhead to 
Washington, to New York, to Chicago.
  I am perplexed because, Mr. Speaker, like many here in this body, I 
have three children, and they have children. We have constituents that 
are out there. I have a 13-year-old, an 11-year-old, and an 8-year-old. 
By the time my 8-year-old goes to college, she will not know a world 
without Iran having a nuclear weapon. The chants of ``death to 
America'' in the streets, at some point in time, we have to take their 
word that that is exactly what they want to do.
  When we look at this agreement, this legitimizes Iran's nuclear 
program and provides Iran's illicit nuclear pursuit with international 
stamps of approval. This is what Iran has been desperately

[[Page H5878]]

seeking; yet we have just handed it to them on a platter.
  Let's remember, when the negotiations began, Iran was an isolated 
nation. Their economy was in ruins; they were under heavy sanctions and 
were outside the international community, but this process has ended 
with the administration isolating and hammering Israel and the 
administration coercing Congress to accept a deal by asserting that the 
United States would otherwise be blamed for it falling apart.
  On August 5, the President gave a speech to promote the Iran 
agreement, and he delivered the following line, which had its intended 
effect of isolating Israel and minimizing her concerns. Because this is 
such a strong deal, he said, every other nation in the world has 
commented publicly, with the exception of the Israeli Government, that 
they have expressed their support.
  I understand my time has expired, Mr. Speaker, but I do want to just 
note again that a nuclear-armed Iran is the greatest threat we have to 
our own national security going forward, and giving the international 
stamp of approval to them will make the world a less safe place and 
jeopardize the United States of America, our citizens, and our allies 
abroad.

                          ____________________