This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/10/world/middleeast/iran-nuclear-deal-republican-house-debate.html

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Republican Revolt Stalls House Debate on Iran Nuclear Deal Republican Revolt Stalls House Debate on Iran Nuclear Deal
(about 7 hours later)
WASHINGTON — House Republican leaders on Wednesday postponed debate on President Obama’s landmark nuclear accord with Iran amid a revolt by some Republicans who claimed the White House had not disclosed secret side agreements on the deal. WASHINGTON — Confronted with a rank-and-file uprising, House Republican leaders on Wednesday abruptly shifted tactics in their battle against President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, splitting off from their Senate colleagues and all but ensuring that no legislation opposing the accord will emerge from Congress this month.
The delay of the historic debate because of Republican infighting opened a new twist in the White House’s effort to move forward with the accord, but it appeared it would have little impact on its prospects. Under the legislation passed this spring that gave Congress a say in the nuclear deal, lawmakers have until mid-September to approve or disapprove the accord. If they do nothing, it goes into force. As House Republicans struggled over tactics, Senate Republicans conceded that the White House had prevailed and the accord could not be stopped. A Senate vote to cut off debate on a resolution disapproving the accord could come as soon as Thursday, and Democrats might have the votes to filibuster it.
On Tuesday, the administration succeeded in securing the votes needed in the Senate to block the Republican disapproval resolution on the deal in that chamber, sparing Mr. Obama from having to use his veto pen. The unexpected, but hardly uncharacteristic, Republican infighting delayed a debate on the nuclear deal, which had been set to begin on Wednesday afternoon. Republican leaders had planned for that debate to culminate in a vote on a resolution denouncing the accord.
But even as the White House seemed to sidestep the potential diplomatic embarrassment that might accompany such a veto, some Republicans in the House were opening a new line of attack against the deal. The resolution was certain to pass with overwhelming Republican support and the backing of at least a dozen Democrats.
Led by Representatives Peter Roskam of Illinois and Mike Pompeo of Kansas, they alleged that there were secret side agreements between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency, which will help enforce the nuclear agreement, and that the text of those agreements had not been disclosed to Congress. Yet House Republican leaders were blocked by yet another revolt from their right flank. Conservative lawmakers claimed that the White House had not disclosed secret side agreements on the deal, and to assuage the group, led by Representative Peter Roskam of Illinois and Mike Pompeo of Kansas, House leaders decided that they would instead hold a vote to approve the Iran agreement. That would force Democrats to assert their support for the contentious accord, a vote Republicans hope will be more politically costly than the originally planned vote on a resolution disapproving of the nuclear deal.
The Republicans also planned to hold votes on two other measures: a statement chastising the White House for failing to provide full information on the accord, and a bill that would bar the administration from lifting economic sanctions. All three votes could occur on Friday, the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Over all, the developments in the House appeared unlikely to have any effect on the deal with Iran going forward. On Tuesday, the administration succeeded in securing the votes needed in the Senate to block the Republican disapproval resolution in that chamber, sparing Mr. Obama from having to use his veto pen.
Instead, the infighting brought caustic denunciations from conservative commentators off Capitol Hill, who expressed amazement that after months of rancorous debate, the House and Senate would not even be considering the same bills. As Republicans inside the Capitol dickered over tactics, a rally outside against the deal created its own spectacle featuring Donald J. Trump, Sarah Palin and one of the stars of “Duck Dynasty,” Phil Robertson.
Still, Mr. Roskam said, it was important to fight the deal in every way possible. “A majority of the House, a majority of the Senate, a majority of the American public, recognize that this is a bad deal,” he said.
“You use every conceivable tool if you think this is a bad deal, and I do.”
The Republicans led by Mr. Roskam and Mr. Pompeo asserted that there had been secret side agreements between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency, which will help enforce the nuclear agreement, and that the text of those agreements had not been disclosed to Congress.
Under a law adopted in April, reflecting a compromise between the White House and Republican leaders, Congress was given a formal role in approving the Iran deal, with a vote to follow a 60-day review process. The 60-day period was to begin upon transmittal of the text of the agreement.Under a law adopted in April, reflecting a compromise between the White House and Republican leaders, Congress was given a formal role in approving the Iran deal, with a vote to follow a 60-day review process. The 60-day period was to begin upon transmittal of the text of the agreement.
Administration officials have repeatedly said an agreement between Iran and the atomic agency over past nuclear research at a military facility called Parchin was not connected to the deal made by Iran and six world powers to contain its nuclear program.Administration officials have repeatedly said an agreement between Iran and the atomic agency over past nuclear research at a military facility called Parchin was not connected to the deal made by Iran and six world powers to contain its nuclear program.
The I.A.E.A., which has long had a role in monitoring Iran’s nuclear program, is not covered by Congress’s Iran Nuclear Review Act, and the White House does not have the documents Republicans have demanded, administration officials have said, both in public hearings and private, classified sessions. The energy agency, which has long had a role in monitoring Iran’s nuclear program, is not covered by Congress’s Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, and the White House does not have the documents Republicans have demanded, administration officials have said in public hearings and private, classified sessions.
Still, the Republican critics now say the 60-day clock should never have started ticking and a vote — as expected this week on a resolution disapproving the accord — would be premature. Still, the Republican critics now say the 60-day clock should never have started ticking, and Mr. Roskam said the coming vote to approve the accord would be conducted outside the parameters set by the April legislation.
House Republicans might be examining some legal recourse to hold the administration in violation of the review act, but the delay would seem to have no impact on the final result anyway. There is not enough support for it in the Senate to overcome a Democratic filibuster and bring the resolution to an up-or-down vote. Even some Senate Republicans said they disagreed with that approach.
Republicans have remained unanimous in opposition to the Iran deal, while most Democrats are backing the White House. A few Democrats in each chamber have said they will oppose the deal. Debate in each chamber was expected this week. Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said that he agreed the White House had not turned over all documents, but that Republicans were better off expressing disapproval of the accord as quickly and succinctly as possible.
Republican aides said a decision to move forward could come later on Wednesday. “I think that the best way to express concerns about the documents as well as concerns about the deal itself is to vote to disapprove the deal,” Mr. Corker said at a news conference. “The clock ends on Sept. 17th. The president is going to go ahead and start lifting sanctions.”
For their part, Senate Republicans sharply criticized Democrats in their chamber for planning to filibuster the resolution of disapproval and prevent a vote on it.
Republicans have remained unanimous in opposition to the Iran deal, while most Democrats are backing the White House. A few Democrats in each chamber have said they oppose the deal.
Even with the outcome already predetermined in the Senate, lawmakers started a fierce and emotional debate on Wednesday.
Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, noted that the other world powers that helped negotiate the deal were prepared to move forward regardless of opposition by Congress. “The only alternative to the agreement we now have is no agreement at all,” she said.
Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, said he had many concerns about the agreement but would support it. “It makes the threat of a nuclear Iran less imminent,” he said.
Some Republicans were gravely pessimistic in their opposition, including Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, who predicted that the accord would let Iran develop nuclear weapons and warned that it could lead to “a nuclear warhead exploding over Tel Aviv.”