tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN September 9, 2015 12:00pm-2:01pm EDT
the iran nuclear agreement. 11 hours of debate will be spread among various committees. final passage could happen on friday. we are hearing that this could be a brief session when members gavel in and members may go into recess. and so we are prepared for that particular situation. however, the house is set to come in at noon eastern live here on c-span.
the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer today will be offered by our guest chaplain rev repped robert michaels with serve and protect from brentwood, tennessee. the chaplain: lord god, we humbly come before you asking for wisdom and peace. we are reminded that september 9, 1776, the continental congress declared the name of our new nation to be the united states of america. no longer united colonies. our national unity was strong. lord, we also remember unity seventh, 2001, when terrorists attacked our nation. -- union september 11, 2001, when terrorists attacked our nation. again, our nation stood strong and resolute. today we pray for that same commitment to unity, that sense of all for one and one for all.
we pray for our military and our first responders, noble heroes all. please, lord, help our leaders, grant wisdom and vision, help them serve this great nation under god with liberty and justice for all, one nation, one heart, one mind. we sincerely pray this as one nation under god, as jesus taught us to pray, to our father, with who is in heaven, amen -- father, who is in heaven, amen. the speaker: the chair has examined -- examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 124erk journal stands aflivepled pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentlelady from minnesota, ms. mccollum. ms. mccollum: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
the speaker: without objection, the gentlelady from tennessee, mrs. blackburn, is recognized for one minute. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. speaker. it is a distinct honor to introduce to this body and to honor our guest chaplain, rob michaels from brentwood, tennessee. as is the tradition of this governing body, we begin each day with a prayer, and i am so pleased that chaplain michaels is offering that prayer today. he's the c.e.o. and founder for serve and protect, an international nonprofit organization dedicated to comprehensive and confidential trauma care and therapy for police officers, firefighters, rescue workers, dispatchers and other emergency workers. chaplain michaels served in law enforcement with the 229th military police battalion of the virginia army national
guard as well as the norfolk, virginia, police department. he serves as chaplain for the f.b.i. memphis division, the nashville r.a., state chaplain for tennessee f.o.p. and is a chaplain and second vice resident for morris-hheatt cob f.o.p. lodge in williams, tennessee, where he is an active member and leads a bible study group for american responders. he's an expert in trauma stress, national center for crisis management, the international conference of police chaplains and federation of fire chaplains. he holds a b.a. from columbia international university and an m.a. from wheaton college. mr. speaker, please join me in welcoming chaplain michaels today and expressing gratitude for the good work that he does for our law enforcement and
emergency workers each and every day. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to 15 further one-minute requests on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, today i rise to recognize the members of roann little league's 12 under softball today. lin, allison, kerry, kailee, caitlyn, kailee moore, taylor sam born, megan spicer, lisa simmerson, jayden vaughn, elly and ellen played their hearts out during the little league softball world series in portland, oregon, and emerged as world champions. coach steve yang, with assistance from two other
coaches led the team who went 5-1 in the tournament and outscored their opponents 43-6 during the winning campaign. after scoring four runs in the first inning of the championship game versus east regional champs rhode island, the team relied on exceptional pitching and outstanding defensive play to win the game. i commend these young athletes and congratulate them on a job well done. north carolina's incredibly proud of the teamwork, dedication and perseverance they exhibited on the way to this extraordinary achievement. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from minnesota seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. mccollum: mr. speaker, yesterday i attended a visitation for st. paul, firefighter and paramedic shane clifton. mr. clifton passed away while on duty at fire station 14 in
st. paul, minnesota. in addition to his duties as firefighters and -- fight fighter and paramedic, shane served in afghanistan and iraq as a member in the united states navy and participated in humanitarian missions in haiti. shane and fight fighters around minnesota -- firefighters around minnesota and our nation spend time away from their families and put their lives at risk to keep our communities safe. we owe all of our first responders an incredible debt of gratitude. shane served the city of st. paul bravely and his death is a tragedy. the city of st. paul, fire station 14 and his family will all miss his presence dearly. my thoughts and prayers are with his children, his family and his brothers and sisters in the st. paul fire department. rest in peace, shane. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition?
mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, the president's failure to lead our nation for a strategy of peace through strength has resulted in mass murders in the middle east. we have seen his failure to take action after syria violated his declared red line and used chemical weapons against its citizens. we have seen his failure in recognizing isil da'ish as a threat to american families as the j.v. team. the president has been inaccurate in describing his dangerous nuclear depeel. sadly, we read tragic stories of men, women and children fleeing their homes in syria. they're escaping a murderous government. the same government propped up by the iranian regime. the president is establishing a failed dangerous legacy that has left the middle east in wars and mayhem with refugees nd migrants drowning at sea.
ambassador john bolton said it best when he said obama's mistakes make it mistake to travel back in time to a theoretical world where sanctions might have derailed iran's nuclear weapons, end of quote. in conclusion, god bless our troops and may the president, by his actions, never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from new york seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. velazquez: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, among the three new yorkers, who celebrated their 33rd wedding anniversary lost their they lives in a car accident. this tragedy is being felt
deeply in the lower east side. not only were they respected community members but maurice and beth had been involved in response and recovery efforts on 9/11. maurice served as vice chair of manhattan community board 3, citywide coordinator and deputy inspector of nypd volunteer emergency services rescue unit in the world trade center area and was a dedicated member. he was among the first to rush to the world trade center. for these efforts he earned a port authority exceptional service award and a city council proclamation. beth, an e.r. nurse, also served with distinction after the towers collapsed. i ask my colleagues to join me in honoring their memories. rest in peace. i yield back.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i rise to address the house and with unanimous consent, i hope, to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lamalfa: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to recognize the mayor's memorial hospital in my district, the first district of california, in fall river mills, not only for their commitment to deliver exemplary health care to rural california but also in congratulations for after years of planning and diligence on their part mayor's was recently awarded a $20 million usda rural development grant to address the hospital and region's most urgent needs including replacement facilities for emergency departments, acute care and diagnosis services while making the facility compliant with california's rigid earthquake mandates. it will make the building in
seismic code in 020. access to health care services is critical in rural areas of california, so ensuring our hospitals and doctors have the tools they need to continue offering primary care and emergency health services is very critical to our area. i have no doubt this project, one i am happy to support, will have a positive impact on the whole district and making sure that eastern chasta county have the health care services and emergency services they need. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. kildee: the house republican leadership continues the inaket to govern is starting to have real effects on people back home. like most members, i spent the last month back home listening
to the people i work for and i heard one message loud and clear. they want us to get to work and get things done and set aside the hyperpartisanship and focus on the priorities of the american people. and yet we're 10 days away from another government shutdown. we're no further ahead today than we were six months ago in getting a budget that represents the interests and the priorities of the american people. 10 days away from another government shutdown. instead of focusing on the priorities of the american people like rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges that would help us be more efficient, make our businesses more productive, nothing. instead of focusing on the priorities of the american people to grow our economy, we've seen nothing come to this floor of the house. we can't even get a budget bill. on this side, democrats, we stand willing to work. we stand willing to compromise. we will work with you to put together a spending plan.
we cannot continue to allow the priorities of the american people -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to oppose the nuclear deal that president and secretary of state kerry negotiated with iran. since the announcement of the deal on july 14, the world has learned piece by piece just how bad it is. earlier in year i spoke on the house floor what we need to consider an agreement with iran. one such element was the require of anytime anywhere inspections which will give inspectors 24-hour access to any site inside iran. yet, according to an expert at the hudson institute, iran could get as many 63 days, possibly more before inspections. this will give iran to hide and destroy any potential evidence of nuclear weapons research. this deal lifts economic sanctions too quickly and gives iran access to $150 billion in sanctions relief.
iran is the top exporter and supporter of terrorism. we should not be making it easier for them to fund groups like hezbollah and dictators like those in syria. nor should we make it easier for them to have capability of reaching american soil. but despite our assurances that the arms embargo would not be lifted, this is precisely what happened with the arms embargo ending in five years. the u.s. has a 10-year pause on their nuclear weapons research and that -- on iran's feet. i call on the agreement of the -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from nevada seek recognition? ms. titus: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. titus: i ask my colleagues
to join me in the caucus room to enjoy las vegas night. we'll have food and music annika see noah games. this is what's happening only in district one. it's my pleasure to welcome and thank the las vegas chamber of commerce for hosting this event. it's going to be just a great evening and i hope you'll all join us. las vegas is back. our economy was hard hit by the recession but now we are doing so much better, we had 315,000 tourists just over labor day weekend. we'll welcome 42 million tourists and business travelers this year, and that includes eight million foreign visitors. that supports 366,000 jobs. i tip my hat to those workers in the tourism industry who have helped us make it through. please join me tonight and remember what happens on vegas night stays on vegas night. thank you very much. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute
and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> every day cutting edge medical innovation is making it possible for patients to live healthy, active lives, and one of the best examples of this are lower limb prosthetics. losing a limb is a traumatic experience but the continuing development and advancement of pross at the eblings has made it possible for many of these patients to have significant amounts of functionality along with ensuring they won't be confined to a wheelchair. however, proposed changes to medicare rules threaten changes to medical technology. recently, advocates came to washington to share what the proposed changes would mean to them. mr. paulsen: one noted that it would turn back a clock and force her to use a prosthetic that she claimed would be the car equivalent of a 1970's vega. i share the apprehension these patients have and i urge the
agency in charge of administering medicare to chart a new course when it comes to prosthetic. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. beck and ke glenn sarah palin threatening it's nothing new. mr. doggett: the "national review" announced a suicide pact. 24e conservative caucus founder derided our president as a useful idiot and a weak man. sharp words for a president negotiate agnew clear agreement with an untrustworthy, terrorist-promote regular jet stream bent on destroying america. these these shrill republican
attacks were against president ronald reagan for agreing with the soviets to limit nuclear missiles. while the bomb first rejectionist crowd, what they lack in understanding and creativity, they make up for here today in fatal consistency. those who think the only good deal with iran is a dead deal over nuclear weapons are only in danger -- are only endangering our families this week, i believe reason will prevail and the president will sustained. our families will be all the safer for it. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> i ask to be recognized for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, 37 years ago today, i received one of the highest honors of my life, when i was arried to the former amy
coppaqe -- coppage of wake forest, georgia. we met at college, i didn't like her much then, she was a lot smarter than me but that quickly changed and i grew very fond of her. we were married in trinity united methodist church in wake forest, georgia, we been blessed with three wonderful sons, three daughters in law, and two grandchildren with another grandchild oen the way. those fine young men are the result of her efforts. i want to wish her happy anniversary. we are very blessed and i'm blessed to have her with me today, happy anniversary. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition? without objection the gentlelady s recognized for one minute.
ms. brun: today is wear red wednesday to bring back our girls -- ms. brown: today is wear red wednesday to bring back our girl. i traveled to nigeria last month and mr. speaker, i strongly -- i am strongly encouraged by president bohari's pledge to defeat boko haram by the end of december with the help of a multinational task force with troops made from cameroon, chad and nigeria and also to free the girls. mrs. wilson: i'm also encouraged by a meeting in my office yesterday with others who share my concern about the girls. these men confirmed the news that boko haram is deteriorating, fractured after losing its central command and
may be defeated even before the president's december deadline. until boko haram is defeated and those precious grirls are returned, we'll continue to tweet, tweet, tweet. #bringbackourgirls. tweet, tweet, tweet, # joinrepwilson. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise in strong opposition to the iran nuclear deal. earlier this year, over 350 members of congress, myself included, wrote the president with an objective of -- objection of any deal we should reach before we consider lifting sanctions. the deal that's before us and now it has none of them. there's not any time, anywhere inspections. iran gets key nuclear
infrastructure that they can maintain. mr. marchant: the most important restriction to begin to expire is in 10 years and on top of that, iran will receive $100 billion in sanctions relief almost immediately. this agreement is a dangerous gamble for the united states and our allies, especially israel. our security is on the line and the deck is stacked in favor of its sworn adversary. i'll be voting to reject this disastrous dial and i'll call on my colleagues to do the same. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman seek reck snigs? -- recognition? >> i ask unanimous condition sonet adrets -- to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.
>> the details in the agreement are stunning. it gives them 24 day lead time too hide their materials from inspector. the details are not available to duly elected members of this body. we were told that no deal is better than a bad deal. yet here we are with a very bad deal. the alternative to this deal is not war, as this administration is fear mongering. but through strength -- but to strengthen sanctions to continue international pressure on the largest state sponsor of terrorism. we can engage with our allies and with peace-loving nations with the deterrent of military might and effective economic sanctions. do i trust iran, i'm asked. well based on the last four decades and recent behavior, i only trust them to cheat. congress and the american people must defeat this deal in the interest of regional stability
and our own national security and the prospect of peace for future generations of americans and our allies and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in sadness over the loss of two neevet indiana community leaders, jack price -- northeast indiana community leaders, jack price, who passed away on september 6 at the age of 76. he was in the army, he was a business lead he loved his state and country and community very much. he was awarded the previous award awarded by governor mike pence, our state's highest honor. mr. stutzman: he will be missed by many and i rise today to honor him. we also lost garrett mayor tonya
he feel as well. she passed away at the age of 52. true hoosier values. her contagious smile will be forever missed. i continue to keep her husband, children, and family in my prayers. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in honor of the ridgeway rifle club which has been called the silhouette capital of the united states. while silhouette shooting has been around for around 100 year the ridgeway rifle club has the distinction of being the first club east of the mississippi river to open this type of shooting range in the 1970's. the range has grown over the
past 40 years to include silhouettes of all shapes and sizes and one of the most recent creations, the varmint bench simwell incrowds small targets 1,000 yards from the shooter. the silhouette range is popular with more than 100 people attending matches each month. it's atracked national attention and was recently featured on the television program "shooting u.s.a.." i wish the club continued success in nurturing a love of target shooting, shooting sports and support of the second amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. green: i rise today in upport of h.j.r. 64,
sapproving of the resolution sent to the house. i would like to commend the obama administration for their tireless work in this agreement. since the iranian revolution in 1979, this is the closest our country and international community have been to signing a peace agreement. the progress didn't come without significant sacrifices, personal and professional time. unfortunately, mr. speaker,ky not support the joint comprehensive plan of action. while i commend all those involved in recognizing the importance of a comprehensive agreement, i do not believe that's what we are getting in the past 30 year thegs international community has been subjected to iranian threats and bullying behaviors and has had o tolerate iran's threats to destroy our nation and israel. they have funded terrorist throughout the middle east and the world. i am unable to support a deal
that would allow them to continue to perpetrate these actions without repercussions. i ask unanimous consent to place the remainder of my statement in the record. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. so ordered. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise today to recognize an institution that for half a century has provided excellence in higher education to the people of florida's 13th congressional district, the state of florida, and increasingly to all corners of the world. i rise to recognize and honor the university of south florida-st. petersburg as it celebrates its 50th anniversary. it was established in 1965 by the university of south florida to meet a rising demand by students who sought to make their work in the world. it grew through the 1980's and 1990's and became its own accredited institution by the southern association of colleges and schools. today it boasts over 5,000
students, faculty that are fulbright scholars and pulitzer prize jurors. and it has partnerships with lead willing medical institutions. it's become part of the fabric of pinell las county. i urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing the school as it celebrates 50 magnificent years of higher education. thank you and i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, on august 26 an armed man who we later learned posed a security threat when he jumped the fence at the white house earlier this year, charged past the medical detectors in my district and threatened those going about their daily schedules. the intruder used a knife to
attack and wound a deputy sheriff before being shot dead. just a few years earlier i served as a chester county commissioner and regularly went into that building. mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize and thank those security officers, those chester -- those serving in the chester county sheriff's department for their hard work, those who put their lives on the line each day to protect our communities. unspoken and often unknown to many is the countless amount of time spent training and preparing for such an incident if it ever does come about. we owe a special thanks to sheriff welsh and those in her department for the service they provide every single day. mr. speaker, it's because of their heroic efforts that for those who enter the chester county courthouse day in and day out they can feel safe. i yield the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.
the reason from dan newhouser this morning, house g.o.p. leaders are postponing this iran vote is because some conservatives are threatening to bring down the rule for debate arguing that the president hasn't followed the terms of the iran review bill. we will read a little bit more of dan newhowser's story for you but first, we want to get from you, your thoughts on this iran nuclear deal. do you support it? do you oppose it? what's your opinion of this today? democrats dial in at 202-748-8920. republicans 202-748-8921. dependents and all others, 202-748-8922. from dan newhouser's story this morning, house leaders postponed a vote disapproving of iran
following a testy conference meeting and potential revolt from the rank and file. some members were threatening to vote against a rule originally set for a vote wednesday afternoon that would allow the resolution of disapproval to come to the floor later this week. they want leadership to first bring up a resolution from representative peter roskam that states the iran resolution cannot be voted on until the white house transmits to congress the contents of bilateral agreements between iran and the international atomic energy agency. for right now, the house is in recess subject to the call of the chair. 24e house republicans will go behind closed doors around 4:00 p.m. ian time and scuts this with their rank and file about what is the strategy here for today and the rest of the week. while we wait for some action here on the house floor, let's go to dorothy a republican in kentucky. what are your thoughts? what's your message to congress here on this iran nuclear deal? caller: i am very concerned
about this deal for our country nd our allies in the mevt, especially israel -- in the northeast, especially israel. -- in the middle east, especially israel. they say they're going to eliminate israel. this is very concerning. we don't need this deal and to give them billions of dollars to go and back terrorists and -- we are going to be sorry, very sorry about this. i have called my senators and congressman and told them my thoughts. thank you very much. host: all right. nathan in slarkte, utah. go ahead, nathan. caller: how many minutes do i have? host: just share your thoughts with us. what are your thoughts. caller: i decided to obey
eternal life laws from jesus christ and the doctrine covenants and the relevant law from jesus christ in the doctrine covenants is obey government laws. the government law i decided to obey was -- host: i think you're talking about a different debate here, talking about the same sex marriage licenses and the situation in kentucky. we'll stick with the iran nuclear deal and your thoughts on that john in west virginia, democrat, good morning. or good afternoon. go ahead. caller: thanks for taking my call. your previous caller that was speaking about the undisclosed agreements was talking about the deal. there's an old -- i happened to read, there was an old jewish proverb that says a half-truth is a lie. well, what the american people are getting from this administration is nothing but more of the same. they're not getting all the
information, not even our congressional oversight representatives are getting the rest of the information on this deal. and you know, the iranian regime has been at war with us, theological war with the west since 1979 and the only thing that people need to realize is that when you see the sunni-shia issue, when you see the opposite side of the debate in that region of the world, when you see those people start shopping for nuclear weapons, from other actors, whether it be pakistan, north korea, russia, or whatever, then you know that the iranians will set one off as fast as they can get hold of one. i just think that, you know, i have never, ever seen since world war ii, a national security crisis blunder situation than what we have today from this administration
and israel and the united states will pay dearly if this thing is not revoked or stalled or whatever. i commend the u.s. house of representatives for taking this action because, you know, i'm just tired of republicans rolling over for whatever comes out of this white house, whether it be executive orders or illegitimate administrative dictates. so commend the house republicans and if this thing ever does go off, history will show the blood will be on the democrat's hands not the republicans. thank you. host: this effort to delay the vote on the resolution disapproving of the iran nuclear deal being led by the house freedom caucus and members, conservative members of that caucus asking the leadership to delay this vote so they will go behind closed doors later today and figure out what's next for this. house caucus members asking the leadership to take a vote first
on a proposal put forth by peter roskam of illinois, republican, saying that he wants all of the sent to thede deals congress so they can review them. the administration says there are no side deals, this is just standard operating procedure. these agreements between countries. and the international energy inspection agency that does these inspections. we'll see how this all gets straightened out. that's in the house. by the way, earlier today, the minority whip, steny hoyer, came out and said that he will support the iran nuclear deal, so he would vote against the disapproval resolution. this tweet from rachels a waled tweeting out a whote from representative hoyer, my concerns about this agrement ultimately do not outweigh the
need for a united position on iran. representative hoyer's statement over 2,000 words long expressing concern but saying ultimately he is going to vote for it. that's in the house. over on the senate side, the senate is moving forward with debating this disapproval resolution a vote could come on friday. they still have to work out whether or not, though, the democrats over there can stand united and possibly filibuster this, not let a disapproval resolution even come to the floor. parties, the democrats and the republicans, are meeting behind closed doors for their weekly lunches, discussing their strategy over there. this is a piece from the "washington post" this morning saying that the president is reportedly lobbying for senate democrats to filibuster a bill to block the iran deal in the senate which requires 41 votes rather than allowing the vote to pass both chambers of congress, reach the president's desk for a formal veto and then hold
congressional votes to override the veto. what's the difference between death byfilibuster and veto? in the end the result is the same but when the president's party is in the minority, it still filibusters. meanwhile, your thoughts on this. jerry -- let's move on to mark in minnesota, a democrat. hi, mark. caller: hi. i see it as republicans lying to us again. the side deal with the iaea is basically the iranian inspections get to go with their inspectors because they've somewhat screwed up over in syria, in assyria, so they want to make sure it's going to screw up again. they want to supervise the international inspectors to make
sure they don't screw up. lso, they have 24 days to go and check a place. a nuclear footprint lasts a lot longer than 24 days. so it's just another way of republicans just trying to bombshell the president's plans. i think it's a great deal. it's the only deal. we either have that or they still keep them -- keep on doing what they've been doing. i'm more for the deal. host: ok. well, president obama's negotiators were up on capitol hill today talking to democrats behind closed doors, secretary of state john kerry, here's a photo from the senate press gallery showing a news conference there that the secretary of state had along with senator durbin and the energy secretary, ernest moniz, talking about the iran nuclear deal.
also on twitter this morning, reporting that john kerry said in this news conference that the u.s. is committed to taking more syrian refugees. he was asked about that as well though he did not give a number on that issue. dennis in lexington, south carolina. go ahead, dennis, give us your thoughts. what do you think about this iran nuclear deal? caller: this is supposed to be a country of the people, not the president obama or should i call him king obama. this agreement is actually a treaty and should have been passed through congress before and all these things that are not being told to the american people that are secret agreements, what do we know, we don't know exactly what they things what kind of
they are giving back to to the iranian people, people who just yesterday said death to america, death to israel blow them off a map, how can we, with ear conscience, support an they, t like that when since the 1970's, and yes i'm old enough to know that, i was here then, and since the 1970's have done nothing but support terrorism, kill americans, it's them, hold them, just democrats saying well, it's the only deal or war, that is bull. host: ok. all right, dennis. in the senate you might know this, 58 senators say that they
will vote to disapprove of this iran nuclear deal that includes four democrats, senator ben cardin of maryland, top democrat on the senate foreign relations committee, joined by senator bob menendez, former ranking member of that committee, along with senator joe mansion of west virginia a democrat who announced yesterday he's going to oppose what the president wants to do here as well as senator chuck shumer who is part of leadership taking over that top spot for democrats in leadership when senator harry reid steps down. all four of those democrats joining republicans to oppose this iran nuclear deal which means they'll be voting in favor of the disapproval resolution. you've got 4 senators and they reached that magic number of 41 yesterday. -- 42 senators and they reached that magic number of 41 yesterday who say they support this iran ewe near deal. that's 40 democrats plus two independents that caucus with the democrats. yesterday we heard from senator
blumen that'll, senator pears from michigan as well as senator cantwell coming out to say they will support this. they were able, with those three in addition able to get to 42. that means they could filibuster this resolution -- resolution when it comes to the floor if it comes to the floor later today. c-span2, tune in around 2:00 this afternoon, after the senate party lunches, the senator majority leader has asked senators to come to the floor and sit at their desk for the beginning of this debate. tune in to c-span2 for our coverage there. we'll hear next from neil from cape coral, florida, a republican. what are your thoughts? caller: good afternoon. his deal is so bad, to make it simple, if you went to a car dealership and you were looking t the top of the line of any
type and typed up the contract and put toyota on the contract, not the model, not the equipment, not anything, and said here, sign this, and fork over $500 a month. would you sign that? no. because you don't know what you're getting. they're going to end up giving you a cheap car and you're going to pay for the expensive one. and the security of the united states is not something you throw away. is should have been a treaty but along with corker and his bill the senate under the constitution has the power to ratify treaties. not vote for all these fancy side things they are doing and how can you accept something you -- how can vote on something you don't know what's in it? i mean it's -- it opportunity make any sense to me.
host: ok. let's hear from steve ne in california a democrat. hi, there. stephanie, you are on the air. caller: ok. i'm not a democrat, i must tell you i'm a republican and i'm calling -- host: stephanie, are you still there? we lost stephanie in california. let's move on here to robert in kentucky. robert, what are your thoughts on this iran nuclear deal? caller: i appreciate you taking my call. it's hard for me to get a grasp on it either way because you hear certain things from the democratic side about how good this deal is and then you hear from the republican side how bad this deal is and you really don't get a grip on anything because the government is just not being honest on either side. i don't know any other deal that might have been brought up by
the other side, by the republicans. i'm the independent. i go back and i look back when ronald reagan became president. the hostages that were released. i think there was an iran contradeal, arms for hostages, and i don't see where anything has ever been done to try to get iran under control. this is the only agreement i've doesheard of and i hope it what some of them say it does. host: all right, robert, we'll leave it there. the house is in recess subject to the call after the chair, that is because house republicans have decided to pull a vote on a rule for a resolution disapproving of the iran deal. they did that because the house freedom caucus, a wing of the republican party, asked them to do so. they are in opposition to moving
forward with that disapproval resolution until they get a vote on a proposal, a privileged resolution offered yesterday by peter roskam a republican of illinois and that resolution seeks to cancel any house vote on the iran nuclear agreement because of side deal he is said were not disclosed. take a look -- take a listen to what the congressman had to say yesterday on the house floor. 2 rule 9, i rise to give notice to raise a question of the privilege of the house. the form of my resolution is as follows. mr. roskam: whereas rule 9 of the house of representatives rules states that a question of the privileges of the house shall be first those affecting the rights of the house collectively, its safety, dignity and the integrity of its proceedings and, second, those affecting the rights, reputation and conduct of members, delegates or the resident commissioner individually in their respective representative
capacity only. whereas the iran nuclear agreement review act of 2015 in this preamble referred to as the review act, was passed by the senate on may 7, 2015, by a vote of 98-1. whereas the house of representatives passed the review act on may 14, 2015, by a vote of 400-25. whereas the review act was signed by president barack obama on may 22, 2015, becoming public law 114-17. whereas section 135-a-1 of the atomic energy act of 1954 as enacted by section 2 of the review act states not later than five calendar days after reaching an agreement with iran relating to the nuclear program of iran, the president shall submit and transmit to the appropriate congressional committees and leadership the agreement as defined by in subsection h-1, including all related materials and annexes.
whereas section 135-h-1 of the atomic energy act of 1954, as enacted by section 2 of the review act, states the term agreement means an agreement related to the nuclear program of iran that includes the united states, commits the united states to take action or pursuant to which the united states commits or otherwise agrees to take action regardless of the form it takes, whether a political commitment or otherwise regardless of whether it is legally binding or not, including any joint comprehensive plan of action entered into or made between iran and any other parties. and any additional materials related thereto, including annexes, append ises, side agreements, implementing materials, documents and guidance, technical or other understandings and any related agreements whether entered into or implemented prior to the agreement or to be entered into or implemented in the future. whereas on july 14, 2015, the director general of the
international atomic energy agency in this preamble herein referred to as iaea, and the president of the atomic energy organization of iran signed the road map for the clarification of past and present issues out standing regarding iran's nuclear program which refers to two separate agreements between the iaea and iran. whereas the first of these separate agreements seeks to clarify long standing questions about the possible military dimensions of iran's nuclear programs including those identified in the iaea director neral report's report to gov-201/65. whereas section g-38 of that report states, since 2002, the iaea has become increasingly concerned about the possible existence in iran of nuclear activities involving military related organizations including activities related to a nuclear
payload of a missile which the iaea has received new information. whereas the road map describes the second of these separate arrangements as an effort to resolve outstanding issues regarding the military facility at parchen and whereas in his november 29, 2012, report to the board of governors of the drector general of the iaea stated, they have information relating iran has a large containment vessel at the site to conduct hydrodynamic experiments, despite related -- requests, they have not granted access to the parchen sites. including removal and replacement sizeable quantities of earth are at this location, i'm concerned they have seriously undermined the iaea's undertake verification. i reiterate that iran provide
access to that location and substantive answers to the iaea's detailed questions regarding the parchen site. whereas on august 20, 2015, report by the associated press includes draft text of the parchen separate agreement which details a process by which iran will provide photographs, videos, soil samples and other materials in lieu of giving the iaea access to the parchen site. and whereas a 27-year-old veteran of the iaea and its former deputy director general and chief inspector stated, much of the current concerns arise from the reported arrangements worked out between the iaea and iran in the side documents to which the p.m.d., possible military dimension, issues. if the reporting is accurate, these procedures appear to be risky departing significantly from well-established and proven safeguard practices. at a broader level a verification standard have been diluted for parchen or
elsewhere and limits imposed the ramification is significant as it will affect the iaea's ability to draw conclusive definitive conclusions with the requisite level of assurances and without undo hamplehaverpering of the verification process. whereas the self-information and verification of iran of its own nuclear weapons-related activities performed at the parchen military facility are inadequate and incapable of demonstrating iran's compliance with safeguards against nuclear weapons development and as established by the iaea or the international nuclear agreement with iran. whereas on july 14, 2015, the p-5 plus one, the united states, the united kingdom, france, the people's republic of china, the russian federation and germany and iran all announced that the parties have agreed to a joint comprehensive plan of action. whereas section c-13 of the joint comprehensive plan of
action requires iran's parliament and the president to implement the additional protocol to iran's comprehensive safeguards agreement to the iaea. whereas section c-415 of the joint action plan requires them to fully implement the road map for verification of past or present issues regarding iran's nuclear program which was agreed to by the iaea. whereas the joint comprehensive plan of action is necessarily predicated on an interdependent with the two side agreements between the iaea and iran all of which are reinforcing and indivisible. whereas the state department spokesman issued a statement on july 29, 2015, today the state department transmitted to congress the joint comprehensive plan of action, its annexes and related materials. these documents include the unclassified verification assessment report on the jcpoa and the intelligence
community's annex to the verification assessment report as required under the law. therefore, day one of the 60-day review period begins tomorrow, may 20. whereas the section of the atomic energy report of 1954 states it is critically important that congress have the opportunity in an orderly and deliberative manner to consider and as appropriate take action affecting the statutory sanctions regime imposed by congress providing to the house collectively and members of the house individually in their representative capacities to review the iran nuclear agreement as defined in section 135-h-1 of the atomic energy act of 1954 in order to determine what action, if any, to take. whereas section 135-h-1 of the atomic energy act of 1954, as enacted of section 2 of the review act, specifically requires the president to
provide congress with the text of side agreements. and related agreements. including those agreements between iran and any other parties. and whereas the state department's transmission to congress did not include the text or materials relating to the two side agreements between the iaea and iran and was therefore incomplete as a matter of law, whereas on july 21, 2015, senate foreign relations committee chairman corker and ranking member cardin sent a bipartisan letter to the state department requesting the actual text of the two separate agreements between the iaea and iran. whereas on july 22, 2015, congressman mike pompeo and senator tom cotton, along with the speaker of the house and the majority leader of the senate, sent a letter to the president requesting the text of the two separate agreements between the iaea and iran. whereas on august 4, 2015, congressman pompeo sent a further letter to the president co-signed by the house majority leader and 92 other members of
the house requesting the president to provide the text of the two separate agreements between the iaea and iran. whereas contrary to the law and these requests, the president did not provide the text of the separate agreements to congress or any of its members. and whereas on july 22, 2015, state department spokesman john kirby stated, there's no side deals. there is no secret deals between iran and the iaea that the p-5 plus one has not been briefed on in detail. whereas on august 5, 2015, letter to the -- to members of congress assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs, julia fryfield contradicted that claim saying the road map refers to two separate agreements between the iaea and iran. and within the iaea system, such arrangements related to safeguards, procedures and inspection activities are confidential and are not released to other member states. whereas on july 28, 2015,
secretary of state john kerry told the house foreign affairs committee in responding to the statement that national security advisor susan rice has seen the actual text of the two side agreements said, i don't believe susan rice, the national security advisor, has seen it. whereas responding further to whether he has seen the actual text, secretary kerry said, no, i haven't seen it. i've been briefed on it. and whereas on july 29, 2015, secretary of energy earnest moniz stated, i personally have not seen those documents. whereas on july 31, 2015, white house press secretary josh earnest stated, our negotiators were briefed on the context of that agreement, a reference to the side agreements. whereas being briefed second or thirdhand, including by obama administration officials, who themselves have not read the actual text of the side agreement, is akin to a game of
telephone and is not letting the members of congress to read the actual text of the agreements. and whereas the congressional review period described in section 135-b of the atomic energy act of 1954 as enacted by section 2 of the review act to review the iran nuclear agreement begins only if an agreement, including all materials required to be transmissioned to congress -- transmitted to congress pursuant to subsection 1-a is transmitted by the president to the congress for revufmente whereas on july 14 -- review. whereas on july 14, 2015, president obama stated, this deal is not built on trust. it is built on verification. whereas it is impossible for the president, congress and the american people to consider and determine whether to support or oppose an iran nuclear agreement without reviewing key inspection and verification details contained in the text of the two side agreements between the iaea and iran. whereas the determination by the parliamentarian by the house of representatives, acting as an officer of the
house and that the president -- that the president has transmitted to congress the agreement and related materials as required by law. and therefore to become counting the lapsing of the congressional review period beginning july 20, 2015, deprives the house collectively and members of the house individually in their representative capacities of the right to review the nuclear deal with iran. and whereas the congressional record for the legislative day july 27, 2015, is incorrect, listing the under the heading executive communications the following entry -- a letter from the assistant secretary legislative affairs, department of state, transmitting a letter and attachment saving all requirements of section 135-a of the atomic energy act of 1954, as amended by the iran nuclear agreement review act of 2015, public law 114-17, as received july 19, 2015, jointly to the committees of foreign
affairs, financial services, the judiciary, oversight and government reform and ways and means. and whereas the house of representatives is scheduled to vote on a resolution of disapproval on the iran nuclear agreement as soon as september 9, 2015, a procedure provided for under section 135-e-4 of the atomic energy act of 1954, as enacted by section 2 of the review act. d whereas such a vote is injurious as to the integrity of the house as it violates the process provided under section 135-4 of the atomic energy act of 1954, transmission -- transmittal of the iran nuclear agreement and all related documents, including side agreements and the observance of the congressional review period provided in section 135. and whereas in her august 5, 2015, letters to the members of congress, assistant secretary
of state fryfield inaccurately stated the united states does not have a right to demand the side agreement documents from the iaea. . where as the former deputy director and chief inspector of the iaea, according to the rules and practices such documents could be made available to members of the iaea board. whereas he further stated the issue of confidentiality is an important matter for the iaea, however it should not be used as a blanket to stop legitimate questions particularly regarding verification methods at perfect chant. historically the iaea had not viewed such as confidential. they have disclosed much more detailed facility speask a proaches at regular safeguards sim posea. additionally, in 2007, the iaea iran work group addressing outstanding issues accumulated over several years was made
available to all iaea member states and the board also received a 2012 document from iran related to very specific p.m.d., possible military dimension questions, which happened while the iaea was negotiating with iran for greater clarity and access. whereas part one section 5 of iaea information circular 153 provides that specific information related to such implementation of measures to safeguard nuclear materials in the state may be given to the board of governors and any such -- to such agency staff members as required such knowledge. and whereas article 6 of the statute of the iaea authorizes the board of governors of the iaea to direct the work of the iaea including and safeguarding nuclear materials and ensuring the peaceful end of a nuclear participating member states nuclear program, and whereas rule 18 of the rules of the board of governors of the iaea
entitled circulation of documents in particular importance establishes procedures by which member states of the iaea board of governors may access relevant documents and re-- related to their duties. whereas the united states serves on the board of governors of the iaea and has both the need and the authority to access the actual text of the two side agreements between the iaea and iran, whereas on july 30, 2015, white house press secretary josh ernest speaking on behalf of the president of the united states stated i will acknowledge that i don't know exactly what the requirements are of the iran review act. so i'm not sure exactly what that means congress is acting for. whereas on april 6, 2015, white house press secretary josh ernest stated, we do believe that congress should play their rightful role in terms of ultimately deciding whether or not the sanctions that congress passed into law should be removed.
whereas on april 7, 2015, white house press secretary josh ernest further stated, members of congress should consider the agreement and decide whether or not the president has achieved his stated objective of preventing iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. shutting down every pathway they have and making them cooperate with the most intrusive set of inspections that have ever been imposed on a country's nuclear program. whereas the joint comprehensive plan of action which was negotiated and agreed to by the obama administration fails to accomplish these objectives. whereas any recognition by the house of representatives of the transmittal by the president of an iran nuclear agreement does not include -- that does not include all of the materials required by law, including the text of the two side agreements agreed to between the iaea and iran violates the rights of the members of the house individually, in their representative capacity, impeding their ability to make a fully informed decision on how to vote on behalf of their
constituents as conceived and provided for in the enactment of the review act. whereas the director of the national intelligence -- director of national spence james clapper has labeled iran the state's -- world leading state sponsor of terrorism. whereas the web shite whitehouse.depfment ov states that iran currentlyly has a two to three week break out time to build a nuclear bomb. whereas, legislative action on an iran nuclear agreement is one of the most important issues that will ever come before the house as it is directly affecting the safety and security of the members of the house and their constituents. whereas taking of legislative action without reasonable consideration and knowledge damages the reputation and cridibility -- credibility of the house collectively and its members individually in her representative capacities. whereas the president's failure to follow the law that he signed is an affront to the dignity of the house and cannot be ignored, now, therefore, be it resolved, that the house of representatives, one, reaffirms
its legal right to obtain all materials, including the full text of all side agreements exricing the iran nuclear agreement as defined in section 135-h-1 of the atomic energy act of 1954 as enacted by section 2 of the iran nuclear agreement review act of 2015 in the section referred to as the review act signed into law by president obama. two, directs the parliamentarian of the house of representatives not to recognize for purposes of determining the date of the congressional review period prescribed in section 135-b of atomic energy act of 1954, as enacted by section 2 of the review act any agreement and related documents commit smithed by the president that do not include the actual text of two side agreements between the iaea and iran. three directs of clerk of the house of representatives and officers of the house to correct executive communication number 2207 appearing on page
5522 in the congressional record of the legislative day of july 27, 2015, to state the following. a letter from the assistant secretary of legislative affairs state department transmitting a letter and attachment which does not satisfy all requirements of section 135-a of the atomic energy act of 19534 as amended by the iran nuclear review act of 2015, public law 114-17, as received july 19, 2015, jointly to the committees on foreign affairs, financial services, judiciary, oversight and government reform, and ways and means. four, instructs the speakerer of the house to dispatch without delay a notification to the president on behalf of the whole house entitled failure to follow the law and stating that, a, the president's transmittal of that agreement to the house is incomplete as a matter of law. b, consequently the congressional review period provided in section 135 of the atomic energy act of 1954 as
enacted by section 2 of the review act has not begun. and c, pursuant to section 135-b-3 of the atomic energy act of 1954 as so enacted in the end of the congressional review period the president nay not waive, suspend, reduce, provide relief from, or otherwise limit the application of statutory sanctions with respect to iran under any provision of law or refrain from applying any such sanctions pursuant to an agreement described in subsection a. five, instruct the speak every of the house of representatives on behalf of the whole house to return the agreement and related materials provided in the president's transmission of july 19, 2015, in order that the president may provide a full and complete transmission of all materials required by side luding the text of agreements. and six, instruct the speaker
to take such actions as may be necessary to provide an appropriate remedy to ensure the integrity of the legislative process is protected and to report his actions and recommendations to the house. mr. speaker, if you didn't catch it, i'm >> peter roskam on the floor yesterday. republican of illinois, offering a privileged resolution to stop a resolution, disapprove agreeing of the airan nuclear deal. because of his offer of this and the effort by him and others in the house freedom caucus, house republicans have now pulled the rule for that disapproval resolution and the house is in recess subject to the call of the chair while the republican leadership tries to work out what is going to be their strategy going forward in their effort to disapprove of what the administration and the five other countries have agreed to with iran when it comes to
nuclear weapons. we want to get your thoughts on that today. what is your opinion of this iran nuclear agreement? has it changed? you can start dialing in now. democrats, 202-7488920. republicans 202-748-8921. an independents 202-748-892 t we'll get your calls in just a minute. as we said republicans behind closed doors trying to figure this out. they are going to meet again with their rank-and-file at 4:00 p.m. eastern time to come up with the strategy for today and the rest of the week. they were supposed to be voting, final vote, on this disapproval resolution friday. which marks the 14th anniversary of the september 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. we learned more about what is going on just moments ago from daniel new howser, who is a capitol hill correspondent for national journal. here he is with the explanation. >> from capitol hill, daniel
newhowser, congressional reporter with national journal to talk about this iran nuclear agreement. the vote in the house has been postponed on a rule for resolution to disapprove. so, why? what happened? >> republican leaders met today with their conference for the first time since they broke last month. and there was a lot of disagreement about how to move forward. representative peter roskam from illinois had made a motion in this closed door meeting to bring up a separate resolution, his resolution would put these bilateral deals between the international atomic energy agency and iran, the host country, that deal with the inspection process, he would put that within the purview of the 60-day review. so the administration once they transmit all the information about the deal, congress then has 60 days to disapprove of it. that's based on the framework they set up for how to review the deal.
roskam believes that these side deals, as he's calling them, should be included in that review process, which they aren't currently. by his count that 60-day clock hasn't started yet. but the administration disagrees. so a lot of republican members also thought along with roskam that they should take this rule off the table right now and try to figure out the next strategy, foningsly stall. i think the thinking is if you give them more time and put out these side deals that perhaps the contents of those deals could sway more democrats to vote against the administration. host: which republicans are you talking about here? and what's the reaction from the republican leadership? guest: some of them are members of the house freedom caucus who have long had problems with this deal, but also they are very frustrated with their leadership who they believe is caving before the fight has even started. they want to at least air their
grievances with the deal and let it be sort of a litigated in the court of public opinion. leadership, mitch mcconnell, about a week ago, said that he doesn't think that there are the votes in the senate to go along with this. we saw that bear out today when the first vote, the veto-proof majority. it's unclear if house republican strategy would work, but this is what they want to do. they think they can change minds. host: what happens next, daniel newhowser, today? guest: today there will be another closed door conference meeting with house republicans and they are going to announce their -- another strategy. it's unclear what that is. i think they are behind closed doors right now trying to figure it out. at the very least, the rule on the vote will not happen before that. it's possible that roskam's resolution could see a vote. but this could really open up the door to a long protracted battle that could even involve
the courts now if roskam's difference of opinion with the administration can't be resolved here in the capitol. it might have to go to court to see whether or not these bilateral agreements between the iaea and iran are -- should be included in the purview of the 60-day review. if that's the case somebody else will have to decide it, arbitrate t. and then start the clock again. or they could potentially throw out roskam's idea entirely and say this stuff should not be included and we start from seengsly where we were -- essentially where we were on the clock having been started. host: what's the reaction from senate -- from the senate leadership, them moving forward, it seems with debate on this disapproving resolution? guest: i think they don't have to make any sort of reaction too quickly because the process moves so slowly the house could be done with all this by the time the vote even gets to the senate floor because of their
rules. i haven't heard any reaction from them about this yet. but it will be interesting to hear what they have to say. host: more to come on this, danny newhowser with national journal, appreciate your time. guest: thank you. host: daniel newhowser moments ago talking about what is happening right now in the house. the house in recess subject to the call can of the chair because we are trying to figure out what will be the strategy going forward after peter roskam put forth this privileged resolution trying to undo a disapproval resolution. just learning from politico, jake sherman, who covered capitol hill tweeting this out. now the house likely to vote on iran deal approval not disapproval, approval. the bill to ban lifting of sanctions and a bill to say the white house hasn't given enough to hill law makers. this from jake sherman tweeting this out moments ago about 1:15 with what the plan could be. we don't know yet. again, the house leadership planning to meet behind closed
doors with rank and file, 4:00 p.m. eastern time to iron this all out the strategy for today and the rest of the week. in the meantime, we are going to hear thoughts on this iran nuclear deal. we go to mike in myrtle beach, south carolina, a republican. hi, mike. you're on the air. caller: hi. thanks for having me on air. host: what's your thoughts? caller: i recently read an article by in the new yorker and it was mentioned how the death to america chant is just one of those things that's kind of reasons part of the -- sorry, just hearing my voice in the background. it's one of those things that's kind of an arcane going out of fad. it doesn't mean so much to the new emerging iranians who want to see the ayatollah and the
regime kind of forfeitered awafmente they see a waning power. host: let me jump in because i think what opponents say about this iran nuclear deal, why would we strengthen our enemy because the iran leadership has said things like that. that's an argument being made by those that oppose it. there is an opposition rally happening right now outside of part of the house and senate chambers as the leadership is trying to figure out what to do. there are 50 speakers that are going to be attending this rally. just got underway at 1:00. tune in to c-span2 if you want to watch that. donald trump slated to speak to the folks that have gathered there along with senator ted cruz, glen beck also. 50 speakers for this opposition rally. go over to c-span2 if you want to listen to what folks are saying. in the meantime, eric, in hollywood, florida, a democrat, hi. caller: how you doing?
host: we are listening. what are your thoughts? caller: i want t i want to see it happen. due to the fact that most of the stuff i have been seeing on the newspapers and the tube coming from the opposition party is all they want to do is go to war. and the rest of the world, every article i said, pretty much said the rest of the world agrees with the agreement. the other five countries agree with the agreement. and we decide we want to put more sanctions on it, we are going to be standing by ourselves sucking our thumb. they have been working on it for years and years and years. long before president obama got into power. now they are saying, he's not strong enough. sorry, i haven't seen anything the republican's -- republican party's done in years. host: richard in la phi yacht,
republican. what are your thoughts? richard in lafayette, georgia. caller: my thoughts are it was in the opinion of all voters in this country we had to educate people in the white house. but obviously by the way they iranarrying and doing this deal is kind of ludicrous in my opinion. maybe they are better having closed door meetings. i can tell you from the bottom to the top, probably the voters are going to voice their opinion and replace everyone. host: all right. north carolina, james. what do you think? caller: i think the deal should be approved. several reasons. wonder if anybody remembers the shaw of iran and america's -- shah of iran and america's
role and how that whole transition took place. we are not exactly hands clean in that thing. and this cry of death to america comes primarily from those old iranians who remember that era. i had the privilege of working with many iranian students who came to this country and i know that their opinion generally is they don't like american foreign policy, they do like americans. and they have good reasons to distrust us as far as our foreign policy is concerned. secondly, what is the alternative? the alternative is a military one from all information i have been able to gather. host: we heard from one opponent of this. a republican of wisconsin, chairman of the homeland security committee today on the "washington journal," and he said war is not the alternative. that he would like to see more sanctions. stronger sanctions against the iranian government to bring them
back to the negotiating table. caller: we have already gotten what we are going to get out of iran in my opinion. if we go back to -- for more sanctions, america is going to be standing alone against five other major powers in the world who are ready and willing to start doing business with iran. an has one of the greatest educated populaces in that region. the younger people in america, when this deal was -- and iran, when this deal was announced were dancing in the streets simply because they are sick of the economy in iran and the direction it's headed and they want to break out and begin to unite with the rest of the world again. host: james. as we told you, senator ted cruz at this opposition rally is taking place outside of the house and senate chambers today. there he is talking to those that have gathered on capitol hill 234 op -- in opposition to
this iran nuclear agreement. donald trump also slated is -- to speak. there are 50 speakers to be there. and political news from donald trump he tweeted out earlier a letter he sent to cnn president jeff zucker asking cnn to donate all profits they make from the september 16 debate, republican debate, to veterans. he says that fox made more money because of him, because of his appearance at the first republican debate. and he notes from previous reports over the weekend that cnn is now charging more for ads, a 4,000% increase. he credits himself for them to be able to do that and he said they should be sending those profits to the nation's veterans. some other political news. niels tweeting out, the senator from north dakota announcing she will stay in the senate. she will not run for governor of north dakota. oufer conversation with you right now on this iran nuclear
agreement as the house is in recess subject to the call of the chair because house leadership has pulled from the floor debate over a rule on a resolution disapproving of the iran nuclear agreement. what was supposed to happen is at 1:00 this afternoon, around 1:30 they were going to vote on the rule. it was going to kick off 11 hours of debate, and final vote would come this friday when it is the 14th anniversary of the september 11, 2001 attacks. that now plan up in the air because republicans led by the house freedom caucus and peter roskam of illinois saying they want first a vote on peter roskam's privileged resolution which would make null and void this iran nuclear deal until the house gets more information about these side deals. jake sherman tweeting out the house is likely to vote on iran deal approval rather than disapproval.
it would be a bill to ban lifting of sanctions and a bill to say white house hasn't given enough to the hill lawmakers. we'll wait and see as more develops this afternoon and republican leadership meets with their rank and file. steven in florence, south carolina, democrat. what do you think of all this? caller: give me a moment. i have to reverse order my comments. first one is if the u.s.a. under the obama administration has essentially yielded our sovereignty to the u.n., where we effectively agreed to become p5+1 s to the u.n. that decisions on iran, that establishes any future u.s. decision is to be approved by unknown committees. it is imperative that the u.s. take immediate actions. a, serve the u.n. notice they have 90 days to vacate any and
all buildings within the borders of any u.s.a. controlled territory. , upon this declaration no funds will be translated to the u.n. from the u.s. treasuries. and c, the u.s. will probably withdraw from the u.n. the reason i say this is because if you go back to mr. obama's executive order 13535 of march promised representative bart stupak that he would issue the order to protect federal funds from being spent on abortions, essentially to get mr. stupak and his blue dog democrats the votes that he needed to pass the so-called obama plan, then you'll understand why this fellow obama
has established lying and making promise that is can't be upheld. host: i'm going to leave it there and move on to janet in idaho, a republican. hi, what are your thoughts on this iran nuclear agreement? caller: eamtotally against it. host: tell -- i'm totally against it. host: tell us why. caller: i don't see why they have to rush in and take a vote on it. everybody should know what's going on. and what the promises are. host: a reminder to you and others, you have to turn that tv down when it's your turn to talk otherwise you get confused with that feedback we are hearing. dick in massachusetts. what are your thoughts on this iran nuclear agreement? caller: i can't wait until next year when the people voted a ear or so ago and they put the republicans in charge, little did they know one man would have so much power.
you got 70-something percent of the people now that are against this iran deal, but they are helpless. they can't do anything. and everything that they try to do in the government you got to -- obama that's vetoing it. what you have here you have kerry very weak in negotiating. they yelled at him. if you remember some of the circumstances, they made him look like an idiot. that's what they are doing to the american people. host: ok. brooklyn, mississippi, a republican. sarah, your thoughts. caller: i don't think that this particular deal should be approved. for one, too many documents from all the people involved in it, and for two, everybody saying
war is an option. i don't believe war is the only option. think obama should listen to the people of this nation and take time to bring all parties back to the negotiating table to maybe place more sanctions on iran to make the people of this nation feel more safe about the deal. that's just my thoughts on it. host: all right. melanie in ventura, california, a democrat. what are your thoughts? caller: hi, how you doing. host: afternoon. caller: i'm doing good, thank you. i'm concerned. i think the deal should be approved. i think it's ridiculous how this republican party has taken control. i highly disagree with the people in front of me about how obama's doing all this. look, if you have 50,000 people against you, sorry, the house, the senate against you, how can you get anything done? this deal would be more for this contry. make our country look good. what he's done with cuba. what he's done he's taken a
stand. look, you know what, we are -- in 2015, a war is too costly. we need to make a deal with these guys. it's getting ridiculous out here. and for all the people that are listening, the american people do want the deal because we don't want to be a nuclear holocaust if you will. i was here for the 80's. i was here for the whole deal. and what was the counter play? everybody knows that. host: ok. melanie in ventura, california. that does it then for right now for your thoughts on this iran nuclear agreement. obviously the debate continuing here in washington. inside both the house and senate chamber as well as outside with rallies taking place on capitol hill. we'll continue our coverage here on c-span and c-span2. in the senate as well as c-span2 right now with opposition rally. when the senate comes in around 2:00 you could see all 100
senators sitting behind their desks listening to the debate over there on opposition to the iran nuclear agreement and support for it. but right now we want to show you what hillary clinton had to say on this. she is in support now of this iran nuclear agreement. she talked about it earlier today here in washington giving a speech at the brookings institution. ere it is. [applause] >> good morning, everybody. welcome to you-all. especially welcome to secretary clinton. she, as you-all know, is here today to talk to us about the iran nuclear agreement. which i think it's safe to say
is one of the most if not the most contentious foreign policy issue that we have debated in this country since the decision to go to war in iraq a dozen years ago. last evening brookings hosted a debate in which senator mccain took part with three brookings scholars who are on different sides of the issue. t was a substantive, lively, and civil debate. secretary clinton, of course, is deeply knowledgeable on the subject that we are devoting this morning to. as the senior member of the cabinet, she played a critical role in shaping america's strategy to combat and thwart iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. including having a very strong and instrumental role in setting
up the i.n.s. national sanctions that were so important in bringing the iranian government to the table. now, this issue is obviously going to reverberate in the presidential campaign. brookings has hosted declared and potential candidates from both parties. and they have been here on this stage to talk about both domestic and foreign policy matters. and we are -- have invited several more to be with us in the future. after her opening comments, secretary clinton will have a conversation with my colleague, martin, executive vice president of the brookings institution, and there will be time towards the end of the program for her to take a few questions from the invited guests who are here in the audience. madam secretary. welcome back to brookings.
secretary clinton: thank you so uch. let me thank you, strobe, it's great to be back at brookings. there are a lot of long time friends and colleagues who perch here at brookings, obviously including strobe and martin who i'll speak to in a minute. also bob einhorn and tammy. this institution has hosted many important conversations over the years, and i appreciate strobe's reference to the event last night and the continuing dialogue about urgent issues facing our nation and the world. that's what brings me here today, back to brookings, to talk about the question we are all grappling with. how to prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, and more broadly, how to protect ourselves and our allies from the full range of threats that
iran poses. the stakes are high and there are no simple or perfectly satisfying solutions. these questions and in particular the merits of the nuclear deal recently reached with iran, have divided people of good will and raised hard issues on both sides. here's how i see it. either we move forward on the path of dim a -- diplomacy and seize this chance to block iran's path to a nuclear weapon, or we turn down a more dangerous path, leading to a far less certain and riskier future. that's why i support this deal. i support it as part of a larger strategy toward iran. by now the outcome in congress is no longer in much doubt. so we have must start looking ahead to what comes next. enforcing the deal. deterring iran and its proxies
and strengthening our allies. these will be my goals as president and today i want to talk about how i would achieve them. let me start by saying i understand the skepticism so many feel about iran. i, too, am deeply concerned about iranian aggression and the need to confront it. it's a ruthless, brutal regime that has the blood of americans, many others, including its own people on its hands. its political rallies resound with cries of death to america. its leaders talk about wiping israel off the face of the map, most recently just yesterday. and foment terror against it. there is absolutely no reason to trust iran. now, vice president cheney may hope that the american people will simply forget, but the truth is by the time president
obama took office and i became secretary of state, iran was racing toward a nuclear capability. they had mastered the nuclear fuel cycle, meaning that they had the material, scientists, and technical know how to create material for nuclear weapons. they had produced and installed thousands of centrifuges, expanded their secret facilities, established a robust uranium enrichment program, and defied their international obligations under the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. and it they have suffered many consequence cans. -- and they have suffered many consequences. i voted for sanctions again and again as a senator from new york, but they weren't having much effect. most of the world still did business with iran. we needed to step up our game. so president obama and i pursued
a two-pronged strategy. pressure and engagement. we made it clear that the door to diplomacy was opened if iran answered the concerns of the international community in a serious and credible way. we simultaneously launched a comprehensive campaign to significantly raise the cost of iranian defiance. we systematically increased our military capabilities in the region, deepening our adoption with partners and senting more firepower and additional aircraft carrier, battleship, strike aircraft, and the most advanced radar and missile defense systems available. meanwhile, i traveled the world, capital by capital, leader by leader, twisting arms to help build the global coalition that produced some of the most effective sanctions in history. with president obama's leadership, we worked with congress and the european union to cut iran off from the world's
economic and financial system. and one by one, we persuaded energy hungry consumers iranian oil like india and south korea, to cut back. soon iran's tankers sat rusting in ports. its economy was collapsing. these new measures were effective because we made them global. american sanctions provided the foundation, but iran didn't really feel the heat until we turned this into an international campaign. so biting that iran had no choice but to negotiate. they could no longer play off one country against another. they had no place to hide. so they started looking for a way out. i first visited oman to speak with the sultan of oman in january of 2011. went back later that year, the sultan helped set up a secret
back channel. i sent one of my closest aides as part of a small team to begin talks with iranians in secret. negotiateations began in ernest after the iranian election in 20 13. first the bilateral talks led by deputy secretary bill burns and jake sullivan that led to the interim agreement, then the multilateral talks led by secretary john kerry, secretary ernie moniz, and undersecretary wendy sherman. no there is a comprehensive agreement on iran's nuclear programs. is it perfect? well, of course not. no agreement like this ever is. but is it a strong agreement? yes. it is. and we absolutely should not turn it down. the merits of the deal have been well argued so i won't go through them in great detail here. the bottom line is that it
accomplishes the major goals we set out to achieve. it blocks every pathway for iran to get a bomb. and it gives us better tools for verification and inspection and to compel rigorous compliance. without a deal, iran's breakout time, how long they need to produce enough material for a nuclear weapon, would shrink to a couple of months. with a deal, that breakout time stretches to a year which means that if iran cheats we'll know it and we'll have time to respond decisively. without a deal, we would have no credible inspections of iran's nuclear facility. with a deal, we'll have unprecedented access. we'll be able to monitor every aspect of their nuclear program. now some have expressed concern that certain nuclear restrictions expire after 15
years. and we need to be vigilant about that which i'll talk more about in a moment. but other parts are permanent, including iran's obligations under the nonproliferation treaty and their commitment to enhance inspections under the additional protocol. others have expressed concern that it could take up to 24 days to gain access to some of iran's facilities when we suspect cheating. i would be the first to say that this part of the deal is not perfect. although the deal does allow for daily access to enrichment facilities and monitoring of the entire nuclear fuel cycle. it's important to focus on that because being able to monitor the supply chain is critical to what we will find out and how we will be able to respond.
but our experts tell us that even with delayed access to someplaces, this deal does the job. microscoptsoptic -- microscopic nuclear particles remain for years and years, they are impossible to hide. that's why secretary moniz, a nuclear physicist, has confidence in this plan. some have suggested that we just go back to the negotiating table and get a better unspecified deal. i can certainly understand why that may sound appealing, but as someone who started these talks in the first place and built our global coalition piece by piece, i can assure you it is not realistic. plus, if we walk away now, our capacity to sustain and enforce sanctions will be severely diminished. we will be blamed not the iranians. so if we were to reject this agreement, iran would be poised
to get nearly everything it wants without giving up a thing. no restrictions on their nuclear program. no real warning if tehran suddenly rushes toward a bomb. and the international sanctions regime would fall apart. so no more economic consequences for iran, either. those of us who have been out there on the diplomatic frontlines know that diplomacy ask not the pursuit of perfection. it's the balancing of risk. and on balance the far riskier course right now would be to walk away. great powers can't just junk agreements and expect the rest of the world to go along with us. we need to be reasonable and consistent, and we need to keep our word. especially when we are trying to lead a coalition. that's how we'll make this and future deals work. but it's not enough just to say
yes to this deal. of course it isn't. we have to say yes and. yes can and we will enforce it with vigor and vigilance. yes and we will embed it in a broader strategy to confront iran's bad behavior in the region. yes and we will begin from day one to set the conditions so iran knows it will never be able to get a nuclear weapon, not during the term of the agreement, not after, not ever. we need to be clear and i think we have to make that very clear to iran. about what we expect from them. this is not the start of some larger diplomatic opening. and we shouldn't expect that this deal will lead to broader changes in their behavior. that shouldn't be a promise for proceeding.
instead, we need to be prepared for three scenarios. first, iran tries to cheat. something has it's been quite willing to do in the past. second, iran tries to let us out. perhaps it waits to move for 15 years when some but not all restrictions expire. and third, iran ramps up its dangerous behavior in the region, including its support for terrorist groups like hamas and hezbollah. i believe that the success of this deal has a lot to do with how the next president grapples with these challenges. let me tell you what i would do. my starting point will be one of distrust. you remember president reagan's line about the soviets? trust but verify? my approach will be distrust and verify. we should anticipate that iran will test the next president.
they'll want to see how far they can bend the rules. that won't work if i'm in the white house. i'll hold the line against iranian noncompliance. that means penalties even for small violations. keeping our allies onboard but being willing to snap back sanctions into place unilaterally if we have to. working with congress to close any gaps in the sanctions. right now members of congress are offering proposals to that effect. and i think the current administration should work with them to see whether there are additional steps that could be taken. finally, it means ensuring that the iaea has the resources it needs from finances to personnel to equipment to hold iran's feet to the fire. but the most important thing we can do to keep iran from cheating or trying to wait us out is to shape iranian expectations right from the
start. the iranians and the world need to understand that we will act decisively if we need to. so here's my message to iran's leaders. the united states will never allow you to aguirre a nuclear weapon. as president, i will take whatever actions are necessary to protect the united states and our allies. i will not hesitate to take military action if iran attempts to obtain a nuclear weapon. and i will set up my successor to be able to credibly make the same pledge. we will make clear to iran that our national commitment to prevention will not waiver depending on who's in office. it's permanent. should it become necessary in the future having exhausted peaceful alternatives to turn to military force, we will have preserved and in some cases
enhanced our capacity to act. and because we have proven our commitment to diplomacy first, the world will more likely join us. then there's the broader issue of countering iran's bad behavior across the region. taking nuclear weapons out of the equation is crucial because in iran -- an iran with nuclear weapons is so much more dangerous than an iran without them. but even without nuclear weapons , we still see iran's fingerprints on nearly every conflict across the middle east. they support bad actors from syria to lebanon to yemen. they vow to destroy israel and that's worth saying gefpblet they vow to destroy israel. -- saying again. they vow to destroy israel. we can never take that lightly particularly when iran ships advanced missiles to hezbollah
and the ayatollah outlines an actual strategy for eliminating israel or talks about how israel won't exist in 25 years just like he did today. and in addition to all the malicious activity they already underwrite, we've got to anticipate that iran could use some of the economic relief they get from this deal to pay for even more. so as president i will raise the costs for their actions and confront them across the board. my strategy will be based on five strong pillars. first, i will deepen america's unshakable commitment to israel's security. including our long-standing tradition of guaranteeing israel's qualitative military edge. i'll increase support for israeli rocket and missile defenses and for intelligence sharing. i'll sell israel the most sophisticated fire aircraft ever
developed, the f-35. we'll work together to develop and implement better tunnel detection technology to prevent arms smuggling and kidnapping. as well as the strongest possible missile defense system for northern israel which has been subjected to hezbollah attacks for years. second, i will reaffirm that the persian gulf is a region of vital interest to the united states. we don't want any of iran's unfinished business to develop or aguirre a nuclear weapons program either. we want them to feel and be secure. i will sustain a robust military presence in the region, especially our air and naval forces. we'll keep the strait of hormuz open. we'll increase security cooperation with our gulf allies, including against sharing, military support, and missile defense. to ensure they can defend against iranian aggression.
even if that takes the form of cyberattacks or other nontraditional threats. iran should understand that the united states and i as president will not stand by as our gulf allies and partners are threatened. we will act. third, i will build a coalition to counter iran's proxies, particularly hezbollah. that means enforcing and strengthening the rules prohibiting the transfer of weapons to hezbollah. looking at new ways to choke off their funding and pressing our partners to treat hezbollah as a terrorist organization it is it's time to eliminate the false distinction that some still make between the supposed political and military wings. if you're part of hezbollah, you're part of a terrorist organization, plain and several. beyond hezbollah i'll crack down on the shipment of weapons to
hamas and push turkey and qatar to end their financial support. i'll press our partners in the region to prevent aircraft and ships owned by companies linked to iran's revolutionary guard from entering their territories and urge our partners to block iranian planes from entering their airspace on their way to yemen and syria. across the board, i will vigorously enforce and strengthen, if necessary, the american sanctions on iran and its revolutionary guard for its sponsorship of terrorism, its ballistic missile program, and other destabilizing activities. i'll enforce and strengthen if necessary our restrictions on sending arms to iran and from iran to bad actors like syria. and i'll impose these sanctions on everyone involved in these activities whether they are in iran or overseas. this will be a special imperative as some of the u.n.
sanctions lapse. so the u.s. and our partners have to step up. fourth, i'll stand as i always have against iran's abuses at home from its detention of political prisoners to its crackdown on freedom of expression, including online. it's inhumane policies hold back talented and spirited people. our karl is not and never has been with the iranian people. they have a bright future. a hopeful future. if they weren't held back by their leaders. as i said before, i think we were too restrained in our support of the protests in june, 2009, and in our condemnation of the government crackdown that followed. that won't happen again. we will enforce and if need be broaden our human rights sanctions, and i will not rest until every single american detained or missing in iran is home.
fifth, just as the nuclear agreement needs to be embedded in a broader iran policy, our broader iran policy needs to be embedded in a comprehensive regional strategy that promotes stability and counters extremism. iran like isis benefits from chaos and strife. it exploits other countries' weaknesses and the best defense against iran are the countries and governments being strong so that they can provide security and economic opportunity to their own people, and they must have the tools to push back on radicalization and extremism. helping countries get there will take time and strategy -- strategic discipline, but it's crucial that the united states leads this effort. i will push for renewed diplomacy to solve the destructive regional conflicts that iran fuels. we have to bring sufficient pressure on assad to force a political solution in syria. including a meaningful increase
in our efforts to train and equip the moderate syrian opposition, something i called for early in the conflict. and the united states must lead in assisting those who have been uprooted by conflict, especially the millions of syrian refugees now beseaching the world to help them. as pope francis reminded us, this is an international problem that demands an international response. and the united states must help lead that response. that's who we are and that's what we do. so our strategy needs to cover all these bases. iran's nuclear ambitions and support of terrorism. its hatred of israel and its cruelty toward its citizens. it's military resources and its economic strengths and weaknesses. we need to be creative, committed, and vigilant. and on every front we need to keep working closely with our friends and partners. on that note let me just spend a
minute speaking about the serious concerns that israel leaders have about this deal. israel has every reason to be alarmed by a regime that both denies its existence and seeks its destruction. . i would not support this agreement for one second if i thought it put israel in greater danger. i believe in my core that israel and america must stand side by side and i will always stand by israel's right to defend itself as i always have. i believe this deal and a joint strategy for enforcing it makes israel safer. i say that with humility. i am not israeli. i don't know what it's like to live under constant threat from your neighbors in a country where the margin for error is so thin. i know that my saying this deal