Hire More Heroes Act of 2015 -- Continued

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, I rise to express my deep disappointment that what has transpired at the end of everything we debated with regard to the Iran deal is that we have chosen, as a body--a minority of this body--to filibuster the Iran agreement.

For weeks--weeks--we have been talking about how important this agreement is and how we have been debating it. As to my colleague from Maine, I agree with him. All of us put so much time and effort into studying it and how it is one of the most important foreign policy and national security issues that many of us--even Senators who have been here for 10, 20, 30 years--will ever debate, study, and vote on. That is all agreed to.

And what happened? Now we are filibustering that.

American foreign policy and our national security are strongest when the executive branch and the congressional-legislative branch work together. That is when America is its strongest. That is why our Constitution gives powers to both branches of government in terms of foreign policy and national security. Yet every step of the way on this Iran deal of the President, the President and his team have been dismissive of the role of the American people through their representatives in Congress.

You have to remember where we began, because the only reason the Iranians actually came to the table was because of the sanctions that this body--Democrats and Republicans--put on the Iranian regime--American-led sanctions throughout the world. Two different administrations did this.

Senator Corker talked a lot about the role of the Congress today and how important that was. So we start these negotiations with Congress playing the critical role--drove Iran to the negotiating table--and then when we start negotiating, the President says: Nope, we are going to do this alone. We are going to go it alone. We do not need the Congress of the United States. We are going to do an executive agreement.

There was no involvement of the American people through their representatives in Congress to weigh in on one of the most important foreign policy issues in a generation. So this body acted. This body acted. Through the leadership of many Members on both sides of the aisle--Senator Corker, Senator Cardin--we passed legislation--98 Senators--that said: No, the Congress has a role. Congress should have a role.

Initially, the President said: I am going to veto that. We don't want you involved. I am going to veto that.

But this body came together and said: We want to be able to vote on this agreement. Our constituents want to be heard.

There were more affronts. The U.N. Security Council voted on this deal before Congress even started the debate on this deal. Again, Members of both parties, Democrats and Republicans, went to the administration--wrote the President, wrote Secretary Kerry--and said: Please do not do this. This would be an affront to the American people.

They did it anyway.

So now we have come to this moment. The U.N. Security Council and its member states have voted on the deal. The Iranian Parliament will need a majority vote to pass the deal, but the world's greatest deliberative body won't. On one of the biggest foreign policy and national security issues facing the United States, a partisan minority of the Senate has decided to take a pass on even voting up or down on the substance of this agreement.

Many of my colleagues have come to the floor over the last several weeks--both sides of the aisle--to explain why they are for or against the agreement. It has been a very good debate. People focused on this issue very intently. People of good will have a serious difference of opinion. I disagree profoundly with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, but I respect them for explaining to the public why they are supporting a deal that so many Americans oppose and oppose intensely.

That has been one debate, but I am not sure I have seen any of my colleagues come to the floor to explain why they voted to filibuster a vote on the President's agreement with Iran; why they voted to deprive the American people of a right to be heard through their representatives in the Senate on the substance of the deal--not a procedural move but the substance of the deal; why they are letting the White House continually press to usurp their constitutional authority to weigh in and make foreign policy for our country; why they have done a 180-degree turn after voting for Corker-Cardin, saying that we need to vote on this, that the American people and their voices need to be heard on the substance of this deal, and then voting to stifle these same voices by supporting a filibuster.

I have been trying to see what the rationale of this is. Certainly there seems to be one where the White House says they should be doing this in order to spare the President the embarrassment of having to veto a bipartisan majority resolution of disapproval of the Iran deal. There are other press reports saying the filibuster happened to protect President Obama's legacy.

With due respect to the President, he will be gone--he will be moving on in a little over a year and a half--but the security implications of this dangerous deal will be something the American people--our kids and maybe even our grandkids--will be living with for years. This issue is much bigger than any so-called Obama legacy.

Today I have heard many of my colleagues come to the floor and say the agreement has already been voted on. I am a new Member of this body, but I am not sure that is exactly the case. The agreement has not been voted on. My colleagues have not held an up-or-down vote on this agreement. They are actually avoiding voting up or down on this agreement with their filibuster. They know it, and they should be clear on this point with the American people.

I think this body is making history during this debate. It appears that for the first time in U.S. history, an immensely important U.S. foreign policy agreement will move forward with a partisan minority of support in both Houses of Congress. For the first time in U.S. history on an agreement that is critical to our national security, the agreement will advance not on the basis of a vote on substance--a majority vote on substance--but on the basis of a filibuster, a procedural vote. And for the first time in U.S. history, the President of the United States sought the vote of foreign nations, including the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, in approving and implementing a major foreign policy agreement and then fought the vote of the American people to weigh in on that same agreement.

Yes, the Senate is making history on the President's Iran deal, but it is not a history we should be proud of. It is history, I fear, that will be remembered for undermining our national security and the U.S. Constitution.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source