Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(118,786 posts)
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 05:01 PM Apr 2015

Congress would be able to review a final nuclear deal with Iran under a bill approved unanimously

CNN BREAKING NEWS EMAIL

"........Congress would be able to review a final nuclear deal with Iran under a bill approved unanimously by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The White House indicates President Obama could support the legislation.

According to an aide to Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, the bill requires the President to submit the final agreement to Congress, which will have up to 52 days to weigh in. 

The bill also requires the President to make a series of detailed reports to Congress on a range of issues, including Iran's nuclear program, its ballistic missiles and its support for terrorism........"

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Congress would be able to review a final nuclear deal with Iran under a bill approved unanimously (Original Post) applegrove Apr 2015 OP
Too may cooks, spoil the,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, benld74 Apr 2015 #1
Personally, I don't think presidents should be able to make binding committments to other nations HereSince1628 Apr 2015 #4
he can't.......... quadrature Apr 2015 #7
And an agreement with Iran means little if it ends in less than 2 years... HereSince1628 Apr 2015 #8
Obama has to sign the bill, though LOL NoJusticeNoPeace Apr 2015 #2
Sounds like Congress wants to take credit for Obama and Kerry's hard work. tridim Apr 2015 #3
Haha good luck getting any president to sign that Egnever Apr 2015 #5
Statement from the White House: Keefer Apr 2015 #6

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
4. Personally, I don't think presidents should be able to make binding committments to other nations
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 05:21 PM
Apr 2015

without congressional oversight.

I know that goes outside of the frame that we must support Obama, but my thinking goes beyond Obama to potential other presidents. Imagine a President Cheney...imagine a President Scott Walker.

I know that our system is screwed by the influence of oligarchs like Sheldon Adelson who have interest in international causes.

But these commitments go beyond one president's authority and term of office As such the nation needs such agreements to have broader support and approval.


 

quadrature

(2,049 posts)
7. he can't..........
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 05:44 PM
Apr 2015

an executive agreement is '''binding'''
on only one person ...the President

and even then, he can void the '''agreement'''
with the stroke of a pen

any so called agreement does not give any
authority to the Prez that he did not have before

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
8. And an agreement with Iran means little if it ends in less than 2 years...
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 08:05 PM
Apr 2015

Which is sort of my point...

It sucks that we have nothing but partisanship but it won't and can't always be this way.

Keefer

(713 posts)
6. Statement from the White House:
Tue Apr 14, 2015, 05:32 PM
Apr 2015
A tentative deal has been reached by senators on a bill to apply congressional oversight to a nuclear deal with Iran. And early signals from the White House suggest the president will drop his veto threat and sign the measure.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/14/congress-iran-bill_n_7062704.html
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Congress would be able to...