Iran Deal will survive, as administration secures 34th vote in Senate

The Iran Deal is a done deal. At least as long as a Democrat holds the White House.

Senator Barbara Mikulski made it official this morning when she became the 34th senator to come out in favor of the deal. Said Mikulski:

Iran Deal negotiations, via Wikimedia Commons

Iran Deal negotiations, via Wikimedia Commons

No deal is perfect, especially one negotiated with the Iranian regime. I have concluded that this Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is the best option available to block Iran from having a nuclear bomb…For these reasons, I will vote in favor of this deal. However, Congress must also reaffirm our commitment to the safety and security of Israel.

That Senator Mikulski is the 34th, decisive vote is a big deal, as she has a staunchly pro-Israel record, bolstering the administration’s case that opposition to the deal is purely political instead of substantive. Now that passage is secured, other Senators whose support would have been more politically difficult — public opinion on the deal is highly volatile, depending on how the questions are framed — are now free to voice their support. At this rate, the administration could conceivably muster forty votes in the Senate, which would prevent a resolution of disapproval from even making it to President Obama’s desk. Thus far, only two Democratic senators — Chuck Schumer and Bob Menendez — have said they will opposed the deal.

Securing the passage of the Iran Deal is a major win for the Obama administration, and a rebuke neoconservative foreign policy. The basic framework behind the deal — lifting of harsh economic sanctions in exchange for a long-term freeze on Iran’s nuclear program, backed by a rigorous inspection regime — is widely held as the best, if not only, alternative to an eventual war with the country.

By phasing out the freeze between years ten and fifteen, the deal also represents a big bet on the part of the West that, between now and then, the large and growing Iranian middle class will decide that they like economic growth more than they hate Israel. A big bet, yes, but not an unreasonable one.

And again, the choice is between war being very likely in the near future and war being less likely in the distant future; that’s a no-brainer.

Jon Green graduated from Kenyon College with a B.A. in Political Science and high honors in Political Cognition. He worked as a field organizer for Congressman Tom Perriello in 2010 and a Regional Field Director for President Obama's re-election campaign in 2012. Jon writes on a number of topics, but pays especially close attention to elections, religion and political cognition. Follow him on Twitter at @_Jon_Green, and on Google+. .

Share This Post

8 Responses to “Iran Deal will survive, as administration secures 34th vote in Senate”

  1. sallyjphillipsd says:

    JOBs AT  HOME SPECIAL REPORT………After earning an average of 19952 Dollars monthly,I’m finally getting 98 Dollars an hour,just working 4-5 hours daily online….It’s time to take some action and you can join it too.It is simple,dedicated and easy way to get rich.Three weeks from now you will wishyou have started today – I promise!….HERE I STARTED-TAKE A LOOK AT….ghb……

    ➤➤➤➤ http://googlemegaonlineemploymentsprimework/start/earning/…. ⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛

  2. BeccaM says:

    I didn’t say ‘identical’ in habits, but ‘not immune.’ Take a look at the first chart. Support for universal healthcare drops from 80% to around 50% for Democratic voters when attributed to Clinton versus Trump.

  3. GrantS says:

    I read the article just fine. Notice how Dems agree on the SS question both with Clinton and Trump at the same rate regardless of who states it? But I do notice dems are funny about Trump on health care (ok). YET, yhat particular article was stresses how republican change depending on partisanship (so was a bad example on your part). In this way the article is mixed about dems partisanship but very definite about conservative bias.

  4. BeccaM says:

    You didn’t read the article, did you?


    Try again before you are so quick to cry ‘bull’.

  5. GrantS says:

    I call Bull that “Dems aren’t immune to this habit either”. Please cite some examples where dems would confuse a gop position with a Democratic Party one.

  6. BeccaM says:

    Had this exact same deal come from a GOP president, the Congressional Republicans would be falling all over themselves to insist that opposition to it was akin to treason against America. Oh wait, a Republican president did commit treason against America by selling arms to Iran, despite sanctions being in place…whereas this deal is attempting to limit Iran’s access to weapons far more lethal than mere guns, tanks, and planes.

    I saw an article elsewhere today, a poll comparing Republican voters’ support or lack thereof for identical positions attributed to Trump and to Hillary Clinton. One, for example, was single-payer health insurance. When attributed to Trump, support was close to 50/50; when attributed to Clinton, GOPer support was said to be ‘negligible.’

    What I think this demonstrates is how these attitudes have nothing to do with good public policy, but with rank partisanship. “Our side good; other side evil” and all that rot.

  7. Skye Winspur says:

    “the large and growing Iranian middle class will decide that they like economic growth more than they hate Israel.” I’m willing to bet on this too. Geopolitically, Iran is much more threatened by Turkey, Russia, and Pakistan than Israel. Obama’s diplomats are intelligent enough to recognize that.

  8. 2karmanot says:

    Next, should be the disarmament of the Zionist apartheid Israeli nuclear weapons cache.

© 2020 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS