[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 13510-13511]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      NUCLEAR AGREEMENT WITH IRAN

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, this September, the Senate will 
formally weigh in on the nuclear deal struck between the White House 
and Iran. We will take a vote and answer a simple but powerful 
question: Will the agreement actually make America and its allies 
safer? When we do, the Senate, as an institution, will be put to the 
test.
  The first test will come in which answer we arrive at. Some might 
take the view that releasing billions of dollars to a state sponsor of 
terrorism while leaving the regime with thousands of nuclear 
centrifuges, an advanced research and development program, and the 
means to improve its full-spectrum warfighting capability would 
represent an acceptable outcome. Those Senators will vote one way.
  Others will say that ending Iran's nuclear program is worth the 
necessary exertion of political leadership--leadership to keep the 
coalition unified, to reveal Iran's development of ballistic missiles 
and its support of terrorism, and to resolve the IAEA concerns over 
Tehran's refusal to allow access to nuclear scientists and facilities--
because doing so would be in the best interests of our country and in 
the best interests of our allies. Those Senators will vote a different 
way.
  In answering this fundamental question, every Senator will reveal his 
or her view of America's standing, its leadership, and its capabilities 
in the modern world. They will demonstrate whether they think these 
things can and should be brought to bear to defend our interests and to 
defend against Iran's aggressive expansion and its threatening nuclear 
program.
  We know that the next Senate and the next President will continue to 
be faced with a threat posed by Iran. So we should conduct this debate 
with our eyes on the future. This is a critical test, but it is not the 
only one. The other test comes not in which answer we choose but in how 
we answer the question.
  Can we join together to conduct a debate worthy of the importance of 
this agreement?
  Can we call up the resolution and respectfully debate it without 
employing

[[Page 13511]]

delay tactics designed specifically to impede the Senate's review of 
such a weighty matter?
  Are Senators willing to focus on a matter of interest to the 
institution, defer committee activities, and sit in their chairs to 
truly listen and debate their colleagues on a matter of such 
significance?
  Nearly every Member of both parties voted to have this debate when 
they passed the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act. Surely, Senators 
wouldn't then turn around and block a proper debate from even 
proceeding.
  My hope is that the Senate could reach agreement to call up the 
appropriate resolution, reach agreement to allow ample time for 
Senators to express their views, and then proceed to a thorough, 
thoughtful, and respectful debate, because it is hard to overstate the 
importance of what we are about to consider: our role in the world, our 
commitment to our allies, the kind of future we will leave our 
children. It is all wrapped up in this issue.
  The debate we will conduct deserves the appropriate and respectful 
deliberation that this body was designed to facilitate. Every Senator 
owes as much to this institution, and every Senator owes as much to 
this country and to the people we serve.
  We may disagree on the first test, but we should all agree on the 
second one.

                          ____________________