[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 131 (Friday, September 11, 2015)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1260-E1261]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             APPROVAL OF JOINT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF ACTION

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                            HON. MARTHA ROBY

                               of alabama

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, September 10, 2015

  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I've travelled throughout Alabama's 2nd 
Congressional District the last few weeks and I've listened to the

[[Page E1261]]

concerns expressed by those I represent. I want to clearly state my 
views on the President's proposed nuclear agreement with Iran.
  Many remain puzzled as to why we are negotiating in the first place 
with a regime that has a stated intent to destroy the United States and 
Israel. Remember that just days after this deal was reached, Iran's 
Supreme Leader applauded and encouraged a large crowd gathered in 
Tehran as it chanted ``Death to America!'' and ``Death to Israel!'' 
Also puzzling is, even if we are going to negotiate, why be so 
unwilling to walk away when our stated objectives fall one after the 
other?
  I share my constituents' frustration at a flawed, weak deal that 
seems to serve Iran's interests at the expense of our own.
  How is that? First, inspections are not ``anywhere, anytime'' like 
negotiators originally said would be a deal-breaking must. In fact, at 
certain sites the Iranians could have up to 24 days' notice before 
inspectors are allowed in. That's a joke. And, even then, Americans are 
prohibited from making unilateral inspections.
  Second, the ``snap back'' provisions the Administration points to as 
accountability mechanisms are weak by their own admission. Secretary 
Kerry and President Obama have repeatedly said that our unilateral 
economic sanctions don't work and put the United States at a 
disadvantage. Yet, the threat of those very sanctions ``snapping back'' 
into place is supposed to be the way we make sure Iran lives up to the 
agreement. They can't have it both ways. If our sanctions aren't strong 
enough on their own now, why would we rely on them as a way to hold 
Iran accountable in the future?
  Third, under this deal, as much as $150 billion would flow into 
Iran's coffers. Let's not kid ourselves to think that the world's 
foremost state sponsor of terrorism won't turn around and fund those 
who want to harm Americans and our allies. So, not only will we have 
paved the way for Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon and potentially 
initiated a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, but we will have 
strengthened the hand of this adversarial state while weakening our 
own.
  I will continue to work with my colleagues to point out these 
weaknesses and make those supporting the deal explain why to the 
American people.
  One silver lining is that the agreement is subject for review in the 
next administration because this is an executive agreement and not a 
treaty. Let's pray our next president doesn't adhere to a foreign 
policy doctrine of ``leading from behind.''

                          ____________________