Following in the footsteps of New York Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., another Democratic Jewish member of Congress has announced he will oppose the Iran nuclear agreement.
“I will vote against the Iran deal,” declared California Rep. Brad Sherman in a press release on Friday. “This Agreement is the Good, the Bad and the Ugly. It contains the good and the bad in the first year, and gets ugly in the years thereafter.”
The news of Sherman’s opposition is another blow to the Obama administration. During the August recess, the administration has been working to create a large enough bloc in Congress to sustain the deal through an anticipated veto of legislation from Congress disapproving the deal.
The second ranking Democrat in the House Foreign Affairs Committee explained that the “good” in the deal comes when Iran gives up 97 percent of its stockpile of enriched uranium and decommissions two-thirds of its existing centrifuges.
The “bad” represents the $56 billion in sanctions relief, which many critics are afraid Iran will use to boost its funding for terrorism abroad, as well their newly acquired free access to the international oil market.
The “ugly” is that in 15 years or less, Iran “is permitted to have an unlimited quantity of centrifuges of unlimited quality, as well as heavy water reactors and reprocessing facilities.”
While he is willing to take the “good” with the “bad,” Sherman said that more nuclear restrictions must be slapped on Iran’s nuclear program to assure the deal would not allow the situation to get “ugly.”
Like many Republican critics of the deal, the congressman lamented the 24-day wait period for inspections of nuclear facilities and a lack of provisions to monitor financial transactions and shipments between Iran and North Korea, from whom the Iranians could purchase nuclear weapons.
Sherman also pointed out that under international law and the U.S. Constitution, the deal is “a mere ‘executive political agreement’ that is not binding in America, Europe and Iran.” If Congress were to approve the agreement, it would make it appear binding.
“Appearances matter,” he added.
In a recent House Foreign Affairs hearing, Sherman grilled Secretary of State John Kerry on the particulars of the Iran nuclear deal. He charged that the agreement is not binding and indicated that the members of the administration who were testifying were snubbing Congress by not asking for approval, though the legislative branch is well within its power to vote down the deal and to override a presidential veto.
“You strongly do not want us to override a presidential veto, but if we do that triggers certain American laws,” Sherman said to Kerry in a recent House Foreign Affairs hearing on the Iran deal. “Will you follow the law even though you think it violates this agreement clearly and even if you think its absolutely terrible policy?”
“I can’t begin to answer that at this point without consulting with the president and determining what circumstances are,” replied Kerry.
“So you’re not committed to following the law?” Sherman asked.
“No, I said I’m not going to deal with a hypothetical, that’s all,” Kerry said.
A factor that undoubtedly figured into Sherman’s decision is his commitment to Israel, a nation that opposes the Iran deal and whose very existence has been constantly threatened by Iranian leaders.
