Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii
announced Monday that he supports the agreement hammered out with Iran over its nuclear program:
“After multiple readings, numerous briefings with officials, discussions with experts outside of government, consultations with my constituents and my colleagues, I am satisfied that the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is the best approach to deny Iran a nuclear weapon and place its nuclear program under strict international supervision. [...]
“This agreement is not based on trust or shared values, and we have no reason to assume that the Iranians will comply with its terms in good faith. That is why the agreement includes an unprecedented inspections and verification regime that will be in place for up to 25 years. We will be monitoring Iran’s entire nuclear supply chain—from uranium mining, milling, and enrichment to the manufacturing and replacement of centrifuges—so we will know if Iran is diverting uranium or centrifuges to secret facilities. If we believe that Iran is conducting illicit activities at suspicious sites, the International Atomic Energy Agency can request immediate access to those areas. If Iran denies access, it will be in breach of the agreement and UN sanctions will be reimposed. [...]
This agreement should not be compared to an imaginary deal where Iran rolled over, and eliminated all its centrifuges and all peaceful nuclear energy generation. That was never seriously on the table. It should be compared to its real world alternative—an unraveling of the international sanctions, Iran moving ever faster towards the bomb, and our country left with few choices other than another war in the Middle East.
Republicans and several Democrats, most notably Chuck Schumer of New York, plan to vote in September to reject the pact under provisions of the Nuclear Agreement Review Act passed this spring. If they succeed, they will face a veto from President Obama. That makes the magic number for supporters of the agreement 34, which is how many senators it takes to block an override of a veto.
The Hill reports in its "whip count" that Schatz is the 17th Democrat to announce support, with seven more leaning in that direction, for a total of 24. The Washington Post has a different whip count of supporters and those leaning in support, 27 when Schatz is included.
The Post counts 16 in the yes category (if Schatz is included) while The Hill says 17, including Jack Reed of Rhode Island, whom the Post says is only leaning yes.
Join us in sending a message to your senators urging them to choose diplomacy, not war, with Iran.
Below the fold, you'll find a list of Democratic senators who one or both publications say are "unclear" and/or "undecided."
The Post has two leaning categories: "leaning yes, but hesitant" and "clearly leaning yes, but reserving final judgment." With Schatz now a firm "yes," those categores include 11 Democratic senators. The Hill, on the other hand, has just seven in its single "leaning yes" category. It does not include three that the Post does: Al Franken of Minnesota; Mazie Hirono of Hawaii; and Ed Markey of Massachusetts.
By the reckoning of The Hill and/or the Post, these Democrats are undecided or have been unclear about their stance on the Iran agreement:
Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado
Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey
Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington
Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland
Sen. Bob Casey, Jr. of Pennsylvania
Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware
Sen. Joe Donnelly of Indiana
Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota
Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii
Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota
Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts
Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey
Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland
Sen. Patty Murray of Washington
Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan
Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan
Sen. Jon Tester of Montana
Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island
Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon