Sen. Dick Durbin is pressing for enough votes for a filibuster in the Senate so President Obama
can avoid having to veto a rejection of the Iran nuclear agreement.
Ever since last May when Congress authorized itself to review the Iran nuclear agreement with the Corker-Cardin bill—the Nuclear Agreement Review Act—supporters of the agreement have focused on the president's veto.
Although nobody ever doubted that both houses of the GOP-dominated Congress would have no trouble passing a resolution of disapproval of the agreement, most close observers have noted the Republicans and their Democratic allies would not be able to put together the two-thirds vote margin needed to override the veto. So the agreement would stand.
But the optics of a veto—it would be President Obama's fifth—have always been worrisome. That's especially so since poll after poll has shown the American public opposes the agreement.
Much of that can be chalked up to the fact most Americans are ill-informed on matters of foreign policy and they've been buried in propaganda on the agreement from organizations that are spending tens of millions of dollars disinforming about it. These groups have harnessed the support of several former Democratic office holders, as well as ex-Democrat Joe Lieberman, who, at last count, was involved in four organizations working to scuttle the agreement.
But with backers all-but-convinced by the flow of Democratic lawmakers declaring in favor of the agreement that they can squelch any attempt to override a presidential veto, the effort to keep such a resolution of disapproval from reaching the president's desk at all via a Senate filibuster has been stepped up.
While sustaining a veto would require 34 votes, a filibuster would necessitate getting 41 Democrats on board. Right now, there are 29 Democratic senators declared in favor of the agreement, with three leaning yes and at least two of the undecideds likely to support it based on their past records. Getting those additional seven will be a squeeze, however, to say the least. If it can be done, however, it would be worth it.
Check below the fold for more commentary and to see the latest count of senators and representatives who have not yet declared their stance on the agreement.
Join us in pushing senators and representatives to support the nuclear agreement.
Edward-Isaac Dovere and Burgess Everett write:
Obama faces a huge pile-up of trouble if he has to veto the bill, and they know it in the West Wing. Already facing major public skepticism about the deal, this could brew more doubt. The other governments involved have expressed their own wariness, concerned that a deal preserved only by a sustained veto might represent a lack of long-term American commitment.
“There’s a cost to the international credibility of the country and this president if a motion of disapproval passes the House and the Senate,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who’s working with Durbin. “There is some harm to the country’s standing if we have to go through the charade of the veto.”
Both the West Wing and Durbin’s team are trying to avoid setting premature confidence. [...]
Of the Democrats left undecided, the White House is most concerned with “no” votes from Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland and Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey.
Although an agreement approved via veto might be disturbing to U.S. allies and negotiating partners, it should not be forgotten that this is not a bilateral deal between Iran and the United States. It was negotiated between Iran and the five permanent members of the United Nations and Germany, the P5+1. And all those nations other than the United States have already been engaged with Iran in discussing various investment projects and trade deals. They are pretty much treating the nuclear agreement as a done deal. And even if the Republicans and their Democratic allies opposed to the agreement were miraculously able to overcome a veto, it would still be a done deal, isolating Washington in its opposition.
Five more House Democrats declared themselves in favor of the nuclear deal Wednesday and Thursday, bringing the total to 74, according to a whip count by The Hill. Those newly declaring they are in favor are Rep. Karen Bass (Calif.); Rep. John Conyers (MI); Brenda Lawrence (Mich.); Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (N.J.); and Rep. Elizabeth Esty (Conn.).
Rep. Carolyn Maloney (N.Y.) declared Thursday that she is opposed.
Here is the list of 13 representatives said to be leaning yes:
Rep. Terri Sewell (Ala.)
Rep. Mark DeSaulnier (Calif.)
Rep. Sanford Bishop (Ga.)
Rep. Robin Kelly (Ill.)
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (Mo.)
Rep. Bill Pascrell (N.J.)
Rep. Chaka Fattah (Pa.)
Rep. Joaquín Castro (Texas); Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas)
Rep. Derek Kilmer (Wash.); Rep. Rick Larsen (Wash.)
Rep. Bobby Scott (Va.)
Rep. Adam Smith (Wash.)
And here are the 84 who are undecided or whose positions are unclear:
Rep. Ruben Gallego (Ariz.); Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (Ariz.); Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.)
Rep. Peter Aguilar (Calif.); Rep. Xavier Becerra (Calif.); Rep. Ami Bera (Calif.); Rep. Julia Brownley (Calif.); Rep. Tony Cardenas (Calif.); Rep. Judy Chu (Calif.); Rep. Jim Costa (Calif.); Rep. Janice Hahn (Calif.); Rep. Jared Huffman (Calif.); Rep. Ted Lieu (Calif.); Rep. Grace Napolitano (Calif.); Rep. Scott Peters (Calif.); Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (Calif.); Rep. Raul Ruiz (Calif.); Rep. Norma Torres (Calif.)
Rep. Diana DeGette (Colo.); Rep. Jared Polis (Colo.)
Rep. John Carney (Del.)
Rep. Corrine Brown (Fla.); Rep. Kathy Castor (Fla.); Rep. Lois Frankel (Fla.); Rep. Gwen Graham (Fla.); Rep. Patrick Murphy (Fla.); Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.); Rep. Frederica Wilson (Fla.).
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii); Rep. Mark Takai (Hawaii)
Rep. Tammy Duckworth (Ill.); Rep. Bill Foster (Ill.); Rep. Daniel Lipinski (Ill.); Rep. Mike Quigley (Ill.); Rep. Bobby Rush (Ill.)
Rep. Pete Visclosky (Ind.)
Rep. Dave Loebsack (Iowa)
Rep. Cedric Richmond (La.)
Rep. Elijah Cummings (Md.); Rep. John Delaney (Md.); Rep. Steny Hoyer (Md.); Rep. Dutch Ruppersburger (Md.); Rep. John Sarbanes (Md.)
Rep. Bill Keating (Mass.); Rep. Joseph Kennedy (Mass.); Rep. Richard Neal (Mass.)
Rep. Collin Peterson (Minn.)
Rep. Bennie Thompson (Miss.)
Rep. Lacy Clay (Mo.)
Rep. Ann McLane Kuster (N.H.)
Rep. Frank Pallone (N.J.)
Rep. Ben Ray Lujan (N.M.); Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (N.M.)
Rep. Yvette Clarke (N.Y.); Rep. Joseph Crowley (N.Y.); Rep. Brian Higgins (N.Y.); Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.); Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (N.Y.); Rep. Gregory Meeks (N.Y.); Rep. Charles Rangel (N.Y.); Rep. Jose Serrano (N.Y.); Rep. Nydia Velazquez (N.Y.)
Rep. Dina Titus (Nev.)
Rep. Alma Adams (N.C.); Rep. G.K. Butterfield (N.C.)
Rep. Joyce Beatty (Ohio); Rep. Marcia Fudge (Ohio); Rep. Marcy Kaptur (Ohio); Rep. Tim Ryan (Ohio)
Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (Ore.); Rep. Kurt Schrader (Ore.)
Rep. Robert Brady (Pa.); Rep. Matthew Cartwright (Pa.); Rep. Mike Doyle (Pa.)
Rep. David Cicilline (R.I.); Rep. Jim Langevin (R.I.)
Rep. Jim Cooper (Tenn.)
Rep. Henry Cuellar (Texas); Rep. Al Green (Texas); Rep. Gene Green (Texas); Rep. Marc Veasey (Texas); Rep. Filemon Vela (Texas)
Rep. Suzan DelBene (Wash.)
Rep. Ron Kind (Wis.)
Thirteen House Democrats have declared themselves opposed to the agreement and three are leaning no—Alan Grayson (Fla.); Brad Ashford (Neb.); and Loretta Sanchez (Calif.).
Here are three Democratic senators who are leaning yes in The Hill's whip count:
Sen. Tom Carper (Del.)
Sen. Jeff Merkley (Ore.)
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)
And here are the 12 who are undecided or whose positions are unclear:
Sen. Michael Bennet (Colo.)
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (Conn.)
Sen. Chris Coons (Del.)
Sen. Ben Cardin (Md.); Sen. Barbara Mikulski (Md.)
Sen. Gary Peters (Mich.)
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.)
Sen. Cory Booker (N.J.)
Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.)
Sen. Bob Casey, Jr. (Pa.)
Sen. Mark Warner (Va.)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (Wash.)
Two Democrats—Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) and Bob Menendez (N.J.)—have announced they oppose the agreement.