The Democrats Who Will Overturn The Iran Deal

Here Are The Wobbly Democrats Who Could Make Or Break The Iran Deal

The White House still needs 17 senators to promise to protect the nuclear agreement.
2 hours ago | Updated 53 minutes ago

Jessica Schulberg Foreign Affairs Reporter, The Huffington Post
Ryan Grim Washington bureau chief for The Huffington Post

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama needs 34 senators or 144 House members to stick with him in support of the nuclear deal recently negotiated with Iran. Obama has vowed to veto a congressional resolution of disapproval, which lawmakers are scheduled to vote on in September, and one-third of either chamber will be required to prevent the veto from being overturned.

The House is considered an easier playing field for Obama, since Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is a strong backer of the deal and has proven adept at holding together her caucus.
But much of the speculation has focused on the Senate, where a close look at the landscape suggests that the White House may be able to get to 34. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) even suggested this week that the chamber may not have the votes to pass the resolution of disapproval in the first place, meaning Obama might not have to use his veto power. With the possible exception of Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Republicans are expected to vote as a party against the deal. This means the White House will have to pull the remaining 34 votes from the 44 Democrats and 2 Independents who caucus with the Democrats.

Seventeen Democrats have publicly indicated they will vote against a resolution of disapproval, meaning they will back the agreement with Iran. A full list can be found at the end of this article. This means Obama is 17 votes shy of the number he needs.

The Huffington Post has evaluated the positions that the remaining members of the Senate Democratic caucus are likely to take, based on public statements, voting histories and conversations with officials and congressional staff members.

The analysis indicates that 14 undecided Democrats are likely to back the deal, bringing the number of pro-deal voters to a probable 31. Another 11 senators are wavering, but may be convinced by public pressure or by the Obama administration — which is heavily lobbying all of the fence-sitters — to come around to supporting the agreement. If all eleven senators came along, it would bring the total to 42.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is the only Democrat who has publicly announced that he will vote down the deal, although Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) is expected to join him.

VERY LIKELY YES, BUT NOT OFFICIALLY IN THE BAG (14)

Sherrod Brown (Ohio) @sensherrodbrown
“Americans prefer a diplomatic solution that ensures Iran cannot develop or obtain a nuclear weapon,” Brown said on July 14, the day the deal was announced. “If early reports are correct, it appears the agreement the U.S. and other U.N. Security Council nations have finally reached with Iran is the kind of durable and verifiable agreement that is far preferable to further escalation and possible military action.”
More recently, Brown said he was “so disappointed” in the politicized nature of the debate and criticized lawmakers who came out in opposition to the agreement the day it was announced.
Michael Bennet (Colo.) @senbennetCO
“A good deal could bring greater stability to the Middle East, more security throughout the world, and help avoid escalation in the region,” Bennet said on July 14. The Colorado Democrat is close to the White House and up for re-election in 2016.
Tom Carper (Del.) @senatorcarper
“I’m doing my homework, doing my due diligence,” Carper told Delaware Public Media late last week. “I’m leaning yes, but I’m going to hold off until I actually finish reading the deal over the next week or so and I have a couple phone calls I want to make to other people who have been involved in this and help make the decision.”
Al Franken (Minn.) @alfranken
“Obviously, a diplomatic resolution to Iran’s nuclear program is preferable to military action. I hope that the deal will verifiably block Iran from developing a nuclear weapon,” Franken said July 14. The Jewish senator was one of several Democrats who skipped Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress in March, which was aimed at convincing lawmakers to oppose the negotiations with Iran. His refusal to attend signaled a likely pro-deal vote, and his fellow Minnesotan, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, is on record in favor.
Mazie Hirono (Hawaii) @maziehirono
“The pathway to implementing a deal to effectively prevent Iran from obtaining or developing a nuclear weapon is in sight,” the junior senator from Hawaii said on July 14. Sen. Brian Schatz, her fellow Democrat from Hawaii, has already said he’s a firm yes.
Joe Manchin (W.Va.) @Sen_JoeManchin.
The red-state Democrat has said he is leaning towards backing the agreement. “Everybody says there is a better deal,” he told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” in late July. “What options are on the table or even basically discussed I could consider voting for?
“I’m leaning very strongly to saying, OK, let’s try going along with the P5+1,” he continued, referring to the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China, which collectively negotiated the deal with Iran.
Manchin backed two rounds of sanctions legislation in the past two years that were opposed by the Obama administration, which claimed that the timing of the sanctions could upend the negotiations with Iran. However, the senator eventually withdrew his support for one of the bills, citing a desire to give the negotiators a chance to succeed.
Claire McCaskill (Mo.) @clairecmc
“The analysis I’m doing is pretty simple,” McCaskill said Tuesday. “It’s not a perfect deal, there’s a lot of things about this deal that are bad, but what is the new status quo if we walk away?” McCaskill came out with an early endorsement of presidential candidate and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who has urged Congress to approve the Iran deal.
Jeff Merkley (Ore.) @SenJeffMerkley
“Today’s announcement is a significant milestone in the effort to preclude Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon,” Merkley said on July 14. “I will be deeply engaged in examining the details in preparation for the upcoming review by Congress.” It is unlikely that Merkley, a strong progressive and advocate of peaceful resolutions to conflict, would oppose the deal.
Merkley supported the president by opposing the two controversial new rounds of sanctions that the administration was lobbying against. Moreover, as an undergraduate at Stanford University during the 1979 Iranian Revolution, he wrote his honors thesis about the U.S. role in propping up Iran’s unpopular shah. Merkley wrote in the paper that support for repressive leaders “has made America seem both hypocritical and imperialistic.”
Edward Markey (Mass.) @SenMarkey
“I commend Secretary Kerry, Secretary Moniz and the entire U.S. diplomatic team for their tireless and committed work at these historic negotiations,” Markey said the day the deal was announced. “We need to ensure that this agreement has the most invasive inspections possible, the most intensive enforcement provisions possible, including expedited ability to reinstate sanctions if Iran violates the agreement, and the most aggressive means to remove the technological capability for Iran to quickly make a nuclear weapon.”
Markey declined to back the two rounds of sanctions legislation opposed by the administration, and is unlikely to break with the White House on the nuclear deal.
Barbara Mikulski (Md.) @SenatorBarb
The retiring senator from Maryland has been noticeably quiet on the Iran deal, but is seen as likely to vote to uphold it. She abstained from both efforts to hit Iran with additional sanctions, and Ambassador Wendy Sherman — the lead U.S. negotiator for the nuclear talks with Iran — was once her chief of staff. Mikulski is planning to visit the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. agency charged with oversight of Iran’s nuclear program, during the August recess, and will likely make her announcement when she returns.
Patty Murray (Wash.) @PattyMurray
Murray has been quiet since the announcement of the nuclear deal, telling Politico it would be “a while” before she reaches a decision. But Murray declined to support both sanctions efforts, explaining to her constituents in 2014 that sanctions should be avoided to give the Obama administration time to negotiate a “strong, verifiable comprehensive agreement.”
Jack Reed (R.I.) @SenJackReed
“This agreement demonstrates the power of American-led diplomacy and establishes a strict and robust monitoring and verification system. If fully implemented, this deal will help control Iran’s pathways to a nuclear weapon,” Reed said the day the deal was announced.
Jon Tester (Mont.) @jontester
Though he has not given any indication as to which way he he will vote, Tester appears open to supporting the deal. He announced that as he contemplated his decision, he met with and quizzed former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer and former Ambassador William Luers, both of whom are strong supporters of the deal. He also met with Ron Dermer, Israel’s ambassador to the U.S. and a staunch critic of the accord.
In a publicly posted letter to the White House, Tester enumerated his concerns with the nuclear deal but also thanked the individuals who worked on the negotiations, describing them as “patriots.” The State Department responded promptly to his questions.
Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.) @SenWhitehouse
“Whenever possible, I believe the U.S. should seek to advance our security goals through diplomacy rather than force. The President and his team, particularly Secretary Kerry, deserve tremendous credit for pursuing this diplomatic solution to one of our world’s most pressing security challenges,” Whitehouse said on July 14.
Of the Democrats who are undecided, Whitehouse was the only senator other than Franken who skipped Netanyahu’s speech in March.
He told Politico on Tuesday that he will make a decision next week. “If I had to make a guesstimation, I would say there will be enough senators to sustain the president’s veto, and there’s a chance — just a chance — of keeping the number below 60,”
Whitehouse said. “I wouldn’t say there’s a big chance, but there’s an outside chance.”
ON THE FENCE, BUT BEING LOBBIED HEAVILY (11)
Richard Blumenthal (Conn.) @SenBlumenthal
Blumenthal was an original co-sponsor of the two consecutive efforts to pass additional sanctions in the midst of negotiations. However, his July 14 reaction to the deal was neutral: “I welcome the announcement of an agreement with Iran after a long and difficult diplomatic road,” he said. “While our common hope may be that diplomacy has succeeded in barring an Iranian path to nuclear weapons capability, Congress must apply exacting standards and strict scrutiny, especially given Iran’s history of deceit and international law violations.”
Cory Booker (N.J.) @corybooker
Booker has yet to issue a statement and is currently juggling his loyalty to Obama and his ideological support of peace and diplomacy with pressure from pro-Israel lobbying groups, who gave Booker significant backing during the last election cycle. Earlier this year, Booker heeded the president’s call to resist voting for new sanctions.
The Rev. Al Sharpton, who is close to Booker, admonished the senator on Twitter last week, suggesting it was hypocritical to quote Tupac saying “They have money for war but can’t feed the poor” while also casting a vote that could lead to war.
Maria Cantwell (Wash.) @SenatorCantwell
“It’s a really busy time around here and people are trying to do other things,” Cantwell told Politico shortly before the August recess. “And so if you don’t have to decide in the next two days, then people will take their time.” Cantwell has given no other public indication of how she’ll vote.
Chris Coons (Del.) @ChrisCoons
Coons is a close ally of the Obama administration. When lawmakers were considering legislation to give Congress a vote on the eventual Iran deal, Coons, along with Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), played an instrumental role in modifying the bill into something that was amenable to the White House. However, he has also supported controversial sanctions legislation in the past.
Before leaving for recess, Coons said he had some concerns about the IAEA’s ability to conduct a meaningful investigation into whether Iran sought nuclear weapons in the past.
Joe Donnelly (Ind.) @SenDonnelly
Donnelly has been one of the most tight-lipped senators about the issue, but supported the efforts to sanction Iran in the midst of talks.
Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.) @SenatorHeitkamp
Heitkamp was one of the original co-sponsors of the bill that provided Congress with the opportunity to vote on the Iran deal — which, in its original version, faced a veto threat from Obama. Although Heitkamp stayed quiet after the initial announcement of the deal, she has since posted the entire text of the agreement on Medium and encouraged her constituents to read up.
She recently advocated lifting the export ban on U.S. oil, arguing that if Iran’s oil industry received sanctions relief, U.S. oil exports should be allowed to flow freely — an indication she thinks the nuclear deal is likely to go into effect.
Heitkamp is likely to find herself under pressure from her sizable progressive women’s donor network. Her supporters was disappointed by her vote against background check legislation, but cheered when she opposed Larry Summers’ bid for chairman of the Federal Reserve. Many of those donors are pushing for approval of the Iran deal.
Gary Peters (Mich.) @Peters4Michigan
Peters has not yet issued a statement on the Iran deal, but was a co-sponsor on the most recent sanctions legislation. As the lone freshman Democrat, Peters is unlikely to make waves by breaking with a president of his party on the cornerstone of the administration’s foreign policy agenda.
Harry Reid (Nev.) @SenatorReid
Although the retiring Senate Minority Leader has not come out publicly in favor of the nuclear accord yet, he has tended to heed the Obama administration’s requests to give diplomacy a chance. As majority leader in the last Congress, Reid blocked attempts to vote on new sanctions. More recently, he opposed the timing of the vote on the bill that gave Congress a vote on the deal, again citing concerns that it would hinder negotiations.
Debbie Stabenow (Mich.) @SenStabenow
Stabenow has been noticeably quiet on the Iran deal. She has not issued a statement and her public comments have been cryptic while also suggesting she is open to the accord. “We have to look at what the alternatives are and really be very thoughtful because it is incredibly serious for the United States and for Israel and for the world. … It’s a very difficult issue,” she told The Detroit News last month.
Stabenow is the vice chairwoman of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee and close with Schumer, who has publicly opposed the deal. She recently defended Schumer against the administration’s criticism of his decision, saying, “I think it’s very unfortunate to see the comments coming from people connected with the White House.”
Mark Warner (Va.) @MarkWarner
Warner has not yet indicated which way he’ll vote, but recently pushed back on critics who accused the Obama administration of rushing into a bad deal to cement the president’s legacy. “I find it remarkable that some members seem to impugn that you are not there trying to do the best deal possible for the United States of America and for long-term prospects of stability in the region,” he said to Sherman, the lead U.S. negotiator, during a recent Senate Banking Committee hearing.
“I’ve got more due diligence to do,” he said at the time about his position on the deal.
Ron Wyden (Ore.) @RonWyden
“I said all along I was skeptical that Iran’s leaders would agree to dismantle their nuclear weapons program and I have questions about whether this agreement accomplishes that, particularly in light of Iran’s history on this issue,” Wyden said on July 14. “However, I will use my seat on the Senate Intelligence Committee to thoroughly review the details.”
Wyden, who is Jewish, is up for re-election in 2016 and has been a top recipient of funding from pro-Israel groups, the most powerful of which oppose the Iran deal. However, Wyden abided by the Obama administration’s requests to hold off on new sanctions.
LEANING NO (2)
Ben Cardin (Md.) @SenatorCardin
Cardin was noncommittal in his July 14 response to the deal: “In our deliberations we need to ensure the negotiations resulted in a comprehensive, long-lasting, and verifiable outcome that also provides for snap-back of sanctions should Iran deviate from its commitments. Congress faces a solemn charge that I expect will be fulfilled to the best of our abilities and at the highest of standards beginning today.”
As the newly ascendant ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Cardin acted as the liaison between the White House and committee chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) in the lead-up to a vote on the bill that gave Congress a vote on the deal — his involvement ultimately helped produce a watered-down version of the bill that was amenable to the White House. The bill was touted as a sign of the strength the committee could wield with bipartisan cooperation.
(However, if Cardin hoped that Corker would join him in bipartisan support of the Iran deal, those hopes were quickly dashed. Although Corker has not formally announced which way he will vote, he began loudly criticizing the agreement almost immediately after it was announced.)
In the past, Cardin has cooperated closely with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, one of the staunchest critics of the deal, and is facing pressure from the group to vote down the agreement.
Bob Casey (Pa.) @SenBobCasey
Casey was an original co-sponsor on the two controversial attempts to intensify sanctions. In his only statement since the deal was announced, Casey said, “I will be conducting a thorough review of the agreement to evaluate whether it protects our national security interests.” Pro-Israel constituents make up a significant portion of his suburban Philadelphia donor base.
ALMOST DEFINITELY NO (1)
Bob Menendez (N.J.) @SenatorMenendez
A known Iran hawk and the author of nearly every piece of recent sanctions legislation against Iran, Menendez is widely assumed to be a no vote on the Iran bill. He slammed the agreement in his initial statement: “I’m concerned the redlines we drew have turned into green-lights; that Iran will be required only to limit rather than eliminate its nuclear program, while the international community will be required to lift the sanctions, and that it doesn’t provide for anytime-any-place inspections of suspected sites. The bottom line is: The deal doesn’t end Iran’s nuclear program – it preserves it.” However, Menendez insists that he’s still reviewing the deal.
DEFINITELY NO (1)
Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) @SenSchumer
The incoming Senate Democratic leader is currently the only member of his party in the Senate who has officially come out against the deal. “I will vote to disapprove the agreement, not because I believe war is a viable or desirable option, nor to challenge the path of diplomacy. It is because I believe Iran will not change, and under this agreement it will be able to achieve its dual goals of eliminating sanctions while ultimately retaining its nuclear and non-nuclear power,” Schumer wrote in a statement.
While this position did not come as a surprise, it was met with harsh rebuke by progressive Democratic groups, who have vowed to withhold funding from Schumer and other Democrats who oppose the nuclear agreement.
PLOT TWIST: THE REPUBLICAN WHO COULD SAVE THE DEAL (1)
Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) @JeffFlake
“On the whole, this agreement measured against the ideal doesn’t look all that good,” Flake said during a Senate floor speech in August. “Against the alternative, it’s a much closer call.”
The junior Arizona senator has demonstrated comfort with breaking from his party on a range of issues — including Iran. When the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was drafting the bill to give Congress a vote on the deal, Flake was the key Republican calling for his colleagues to hold back on “poison pill” amendments that would cost the bill Democratic support.
*The 17 senators who have publicly pledged to back the Iran nuclear agreement are: Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Angus King (I-Maine), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)