Ridiculed as dysfunctional and constantly under attack from inside their own party, congressional Republicans have found their footing on foreign policy and are driving the debate among their party’s White House hopefuls.
Republicans on Capitol Hill have stumbled so far this year. The minority Senate Democrats outfoxed them in the fight over President Obama’s executive order to legalize 4.1 million illegal immigrants, while infighting in the House forced them to pull usually routine bills from the floor. But as the Obama administration’s negotiations with Iran entered the home stretch this month, the Republicans found their groove.
In the House and the Senate, the Republicans have unified around their opposition to the proposed contours of an arms deal with Tehran. They have even been successful in whipping up bipartisan rejection of Obama’s Iran policy that is on the cusp of being veto-proof. Republicans are teeing up legislation that would force Obama to submit any Iran deal for congressional approval.
House Speaker John Boehner sidestepped Obama, directly inviting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address a joint meeting of Congress, while the administration’s effort to encourage a Democratic boycott fell flat. Now, Senate Republicans find themselves defining the terms of opposition to the Iran deal among the same group of GOP presidential contenders who have been beating them up on a host of issues for months.
First, the field of likely Republican presidential candidates rushed to the defense of the open letter to Iran’s leaders issued by 47 GOP senators. Then they backed the main point those senators were attempting to make with the letter, labeling as illegitimate any Obama deal to limit Tehran’s nuclear weapons capability that doesn’t pass muster with Congress and vowing to cancel it if a Republican is elected president next year.
“National security is a much bigger issue than it was in the last two election cycles,” said Republican Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri. “I’m not surprised at all that presidential candidates not only are being asked to respond, but generally are responding that of course you want to get the kind of commitment the Constitution envisions before you make an agreement about what the future’s going to look like on something this important.”
Congressional Republicans have maybe four and a half months left this year to pass any meaningful legislation.
In August, Congress adjourns for its summer recess and the GOP presidential primary debates begin. The prime time televised face-offs should accelerate the pace of the 2016 campaign, if it isn’t at full speed already. A competitive nomination contest is likely to discourage congressional Republicans from collaborating on far-reaching but risky reform legislation.
With passage of a budget and approval of all 12 appropriations bills a top priority, processing the more difficult legislation, such as health care reform and a tax overhaul, appear far-flung goals. Either way, Republican majorities in the House and Senate are slated to become bit players just eight months into the party’s first full control of Congress in nearly a decade.
In the short term, though, they have discovered perhaps the unlikeliest of ways to remain relevant and drive the national debate: inserting themselves into the Iran talks and aggressively challenging Obama on foreign policy, usually the domain of the executive branch. One Republican insider working on behalf of a likely GOP presidential candidate said Congress could be more influential than some might think thanks to the near-unrivaled attention the body receives.
“Washington is still the Madison Square Garden of politics,” the Republican operative said. “The GOP Congress will be both instigator for conversation and object of scorn within the conversation, as the 2016 nomination squabbles progress.”
The open letter to Iran’s leaders, authored by Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas and signed by 46 of his GOP colleagues, including every member of the party’s Senate leadership, is a perfect example of the reach congressional Republicans can have when they remain unified.
Republicans, both in Washington and on the campaign trail, have been complaining about the possible framework of a deal with Iran for months. They don’t like what they hear about possible provisions that would allow Tehran to obtain the bomb after 10 years, nor are they happy about reports that Iran would remain free to develop its long-range ballistic missile program and fund terrorism against the West.
Through the Cotton letter, they crystallized the debate against Obama’s plan and defined the opposing GOP position.
To be sure, the letter was criticized by foreign policy professionals and scorned by newspaper editorial boards across the country, not to mention some skeptical Republicans (seven GOP senators refused to sign it). But the missive forced a more public debate about Congress’ role in determining the U.S.’ relationship with Iran. More importantly, it caught the imagination of the GOP presidential candidates, who are much more likely to run against Republicans on Capitol Hill than co-opt their agenda.
Because of the letter, most of the prospective candidates are on record as opposed to any deal that doesn’t receive approval in the Republican-controlled Congress. And almost all of them have said that they would use their executive authority to junk the agreement and take a harder line with Iran if they succeed Obama in January 2017 2017.
“Raising the issue not only helps with the [Iran] crisis, it’s also going to be influential to all presidential candidates,” said Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr of North Carolina.
