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.)
