Saturday, September 5, 2015
Despite its significant shortcomings, we have passed a point of no return. Accepting this deal and moving forward with vigilance and continued commitment to keeping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is preferable to a world in which a debilitated sanctions regime and fractured community of nations allows Iran to acquire many of the benefits of this deal without accepting its meaningful constraints.
Over the past several weeks I have studied the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action and exhaustively explored the possible ramifications of this agreement and its alternatives. I've consulted with an array of experts on both sides of the debate, sat in classified briefings, discussed it with former and current White House leadership, and benefited from the wise insights of both Republican and Democratic colleagues in the Senate. I also studied Iran and its history, its decades-long efforts to illicitly obtain a nuclear weapon and the evil nature and horrific extent of its support and sponsorship of terrorism, its destabilizing involvement in ongoing regional conflicts, and its destructive hatred and determination to destroy the United States and our ally Israel.
I have come to recognize that on both sides of this debate there are people who want peace and share my fervent determination to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Both those who support this deal and those who oppose it have reasonable arguments as to why their chosen path is the right one or the better option for preventing a nuclear-armed Iran without the necessity for military conflict.
After hours and hours of study, research, deliberation and consultation, I am more convinced than ever that eliminating the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran is among the most important global security challenges of our time. Allowing Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon would pose an unacceptable and grave threat to the safety of our allies, to Middle East stability, and to American security.
We began negotiations with Iran at a time when our sanctions regime was having its most significant impact on the Iranians. We were gaining maximum leverage on Iran through coordinated economic sanctions with our international partners. We joined with our partner nations at the outset of negotiations with the stated intention of preventing Iran from having the capability to get a nuclear weapon.
Unfortunately, it's clear we didn't achieve that objective and have only delayed – not blocked – Iran's potential nuclear breakout.
But, with the JCPOA, we have now passed a point of no return that we should have never reached, leaving our nation to choose between two imperfect, dangerous and uncertain options. Left with these two choices, I nonetheless believe it is better to support a deeply flawed deal, for the alternative is worse. Thus, I will vote in support of the deal. But the United States must recognize that to make this deal work, we must be more vigilant than ever in fighting Iranian aggression.
Make no mistake, this deal, while falling short of permanently eliminating Iran's pathways to a nuclear weapon, succeeds in either delaying it or giving us the credible ability to detect significant cheating on their part and respond accordingly. It establishes historically unprecedented mechanisms to block Iran's near-term pathway to a nuclear weapon. This deal will remove 98 percent of Iran's enriched uranium stockpile—taking the amount of fissile material from 12,000kg – enough to make multiple bombs – to 300kg, which isn't close to enough material for even one. None of their enrichment will be underground at the Fordow facility. The agreement will remove and fill with concrete the core of Iran's heavy water reactor at Arak. The deal will establish the most robust monitoring and inspections regime ever negotiated, covering Iran's entire nuclear supply chain for 15 years. Some of the most intrusive monitoring, including of its uranium mines and mills and centrifuge production facilities, will last well beyond that period. The agreement will also establish strict limits on Iran's research and development for the next 10 years.
Friday, September 4, 2015
Thursday, September 3, 2015
Monday, August 31, 2015
Saturday, August 29, 2015
WASHINGTON, DC – The president’s nuclear agreement with Iran and its consequences for our national security will be the focus of this week’s Republican address, to be delivered by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R-CA). Earlier this month, Royce introduced H.J. Res. 64, legislation preventing implementation of the agreement.
"Stopping Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon is one of the biggest national security challenges we face. Unfortunately, the President's Iran agreement is fundamentally flawed, and makes this dire threat more likely - not less,” Chairman Royce said. “I look forward to sharing with Americans the troubling aspects of this agreement as the House and Senate get set for a vote in September."
Monday, August 24, 2015
A portion of the website of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration ( SAMHSA ) was apparently hacked as long as two m...
How big is the federal government? So big, it has lost count of just how many department and agencies it has, according to a federal w...
SEATTLE — Seattle City Councilmember-elect Kshama Sawant told Boeing machinists her idea of a radical option, should their jobs be mo...
What better place for “Dr.” Beverly Scott’s next soft landing than the National Transportation Safety Board? The NTSB has as its m...
Out-of-control spending by Congress and the Obama Administration has once again maxed out the latest debt limit—a nearly $17 trillion burd...
The IRS fined more than 7.5 million Americans who didn’t have health insurance in 2014, even as Obamacare subsidies flowed to people who d...
I just had lunch with a friend who is a manager of a David’s Bridal. She told me all store managers received an email from the CEO of Dav...
Reid Wilson shares a map from National Media, a Republican ad-buying firm, depicting a recent television event: “Using data from Rentrak, ...
It’s been a while since we’ve had an incumbent President lose an election. In fact, it was 20 years ago, when George H. W. Bush lost in a...
Most Americans hold either liberal or conservative positions on most matters. In many instances, however, they would be hard pressed to ex...