

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
This summer, the US Senate will choose between war and peace with Iran. If the right decision is made, Obama's pending nuclear deal with Iran will be sustained and both a war and an Iranian nuclear bomb will be avoided. If the wrong vote is cast, diplomacy will collapse and the US and Iran will once again be on a path towards a disastrous war that will make the Iraq war look like the cake-walk it was promised to be. The good news is: If Americans speak up in large numbers, the Senate will choose peace.
This crucial vote will likely take place in July after a deal has been reached and before Congress leaves town for the summer recess. It's the result of the Senate passing the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act 98-1 this past Thursday. The House is expected to take up the legislation as soon as this week, and the President will sign it into law thereafter -- assuming no "poison pill" amendments are inserted.
In essence, the bill restricts the President's authorities to waive sanctions while Congress considers whether or not to reject an agreement. A vote of disapproval would permanently revoke the President's authorities to offer substantial sanctions relief and thus block the US from implementing the deal. If Congressional hawks were to succeed in blocking a deal that our negotiators had agreed to, it would not just set a devastating precedent for any future US diplomatic efforts, it would unravel nuclear constraints and international sanctions on Iran and put war on the front burner.
A vote of disapproval would require 60 votes to pass the Senate and a simple majority to pass the House. If supporters of peace lose this vote, the president will have no choice but to veto the resolution. The other side will then seek to override Obama's veto - and for that they will need two-thirds of both the Senate and House, i.e. 67 Senators and 290 Representatives.
That's the vote that the American people cannot afford to lose.
At the moment, it appears that supporters of a deal have sufficient numbers to uphold a veto and protect the deal. At the same time that the Senate passed the review bill, 151 Democrats in the House of Representatives sent a letter to the President commending the framework nuclear agreement and urging that our diplomats seal a final deal. Given that the letter was signed by more than a third of the House, if the same number of representatives refuse to reject a final deal, a Presidential veto would hold. That letter, led by Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) and David Price (D-NC), will undoubtedly boost perceptions in Iran that President Obama can uphold America's end of the nuclear bargain.
However, nothing is certain -- especially for a showdown vote that powerful interest groups like AIPAC have been preparing for over a decade, according to a former lobbyist from the organization . Furthermore, if the President is only able to protect a deal by veto, it could encourage opponents to cry foul and pursue additional efforts to block and undermine the deal. Unless the attempt to kill an agreement is soundly defeated this summer, there could be further efforts to re-litigate the deal in Congress, limit the President from implementing it, and pass new sanctions to kill the agreement.
The endgame is now fast approaching. Iran and the United States will likely convert their agreement in principle into a historic deal this summer. Then, Congress will take a critical vote to determine whether the U.S. continues down the path toward peace or marches down the road to war. If accepted, it can be the beginning of the end of more than three and a half decades of US-Iran enmity. In the weeks ahead, it is imperative that the American people make sure that Congress ends up on the right side of history.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
This summer, the US Senate will choose between war and peace with Iran. If the right decision is made, Obama's pending nuclear deal with Iran will be sustained and both a war and an Iranian nuclear bomb will be avoided. If the wrong vote is cast, diplomacy will collapse and the US and Iran will once again be on a path towards a disastrous war that will make the Iraq war look like the cake-walk it was promised to be. The good news is: If Americans speak up in large numbers, the Senate will choose peace.
This crucial vote will likely take place in July after a deal has been reached and before Congress leaves town for the summer recess. It's the result of the Senate passing the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act 98-1 this past Thursday. The House is expected to take up the legislation as soon as this week, and the President will sign it into law thereafter -- assuming no "poison pill" amendments are inserted.
In essence, the bill restricts the President's authorities to waive sanctions while Congress considers whether or not to reject an agreement. A vote of disapproval would permanently revoke the President's authorities to offer substantial sanctions relief and thus block the US from implementing the deal. If Congressional hawks were to succeed in blocking a deal that our negotiators had agreed to, it would not just set a devastating precedent for any future US diplomatic efforts, it would unravel nuclear constraints and international sanctions on Iran and put war on the front burner.
A vote of disapproval would require 60 votes to pass the Senate and a simple majority to pass the House. If supporters of peace lose this vote, the president will have no choice but to veto the resolution. The other side will then seek to override Obama's veto - and for that they will need two-thirds of both the Senate and House, i.e. 67 Senators and 290 Representatives.
That's the vote that the American people cannot afford to lose.
At the moment, it appears that supporters of a deal have sufficient numbers to uphold a veto and protect the deal. At the same time that the Senate passed the review bill, 151 Democrats in the House of Representatives sent a letter to the President commending the framework nuclear agreement and urging that our diplomats seal a final deal. Given that the letter was signed by more than a third of the House, if the same number of representatives refuse to reject a final deal, a Presidential veto would hold. That letter, led by Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) and David Price (D-NC), will undoubtedly boost perceptions in Iran that President Obama can uphold America's end of the nuclear bargain.
However, nothing is certain -- especially for a showdown vote that powerful interest groups like AIPAC have been preparing for over a decade, according to a former lobbyist from the organization . Furthermore, if the President is only able to protect a deal by veto, it could encourage opponents to cry foul and pursue additional efforts to block and undermine the deal. Unless the attempt to kill an agreement is soundly defeated this summer, there could be further efforts to re-litigate the deal in Congress, limit the President from implementing it, and pass new sanctions to kill the agreement.
The endgame is now fast approaching. Iran and the United States will likely convert their agreement in principle into a historic deal this summer. Then, Congress will take a critical vote to determine whether the U.S. continues down the path toward peace or marches down the road to war. If accepted, it can be the beginning of the end of more than three and a half decades of US-Iran enmity. In the weeks ahead, it is imperative that the American people make sure that Congress ends up on the right side of history.
This summer, the US Senate will choose between war and peace with Iran. If the right decision is made, Obama's pending nuclear deal with Iran will be sustained and both a war and an Iranian nuclear bomb will be avoided. If the wrong vote is cast, diplomacy will collapse and the US and Iran will once again be on a path towards a disastrous war that will make the Iraq war look like the cake-walk it was promised to be. The good news is: If Americans speak up in large numbers, the Senate will choose peace.
This crucial vote will likely take place in July after a deal has been reached and before Congress leaves town for the summer recess. It's the result of the Senate passing the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act 98-1 this past Thursday. The House is expected to take up the legislation as soon as this week, and the President will sign it into law thereafter -- assuming no "poison pill" amendments are inserted.
In essence, the bill restricts the President's authorities to waive sanctions while Congress considers whether or not to reject an agreement. A vote of disapproval would permanently revoke the President's authorities to offer substantial sanctions relief and thus block the US from implementing the deal. If Congressional hawks were to succeed in blocking a deal that our negotiators had agreed to, it would not just set a devastating precedent for any future US diplomatic efforts, it would unravel nuclear constraints and international sanctions on Iran and put war on the front burner.
A vote of disapproval would require 60 votes to pass the Senate and a simple majority to pass the House. If supporters of peace lose this vote, the president will have no choice but to veto the resolution. The other side will then seek to override Obama's veto - and for that they will need two-thirds of both the Senate and House, i.e. 67 Senators and 290 Representatives.
That's the vote that the American people cannot afford to lose.
At the moment, it appears that supporters of a deal have sufficient numbers to uphold a veto and protect the deal. At the same time that the Senate passed the review bill, 151 Democrats in the House of Representatives sent a letter to the President commending the framework nuclear agreement and urging that our diplomats seal a final deal. Given that the letter was signed by more than a third of the House, if the same number of representatives refuse to reject a final deal, a Presidential veto would hold. That letter, led by Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) and David Price (D-NC), will undoubtedly boost perceptions in Iran that President Obama can uphold America's end of the nuclear bargain.
However, nothing is certain -- especially for a showdown vote that powerful interest groups like AIPAC have been preparing for over a decade, according to a former lobbyist from the organization . Furthermore, if the President is only able to protect a deal by veto, it could encourage opponents to cry foul and pursue additional efforts to block and undermine the deal. Unless the attempt to kill an agreement is soundly defeated this summer, there could be further efforts to re-litigate the deal in Congress, limit the President from implementing it, and pass new sanctions to kill the agreement.
The endgame is now fast approaching. Iran and the United States will likely convert their agreement in principle into a historic deal this summer. Then, Congress will take a critical vote to determine whether the U.S. continues down the path toward peace or marches down the road to war. If accepted, it can be the beginning of the end of more than three and a half decades of US-Iran enmity. In the weeks ahead, it is imperative that the American people make sure that Congress ends up on the right side of history.