Hire More Heroes Act of 2015
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I am so proud of my colleague from South Carolina for the remarkable speech he just gave to this Senate about his concerns about this President's deal with Iran--the President's nuclear deal with Iran. That is what the Senate is debating right now--a deal President Obama negotiated with Iran and whether that deal should stand or fall.
This agreement could affect American foreign policy in the Middle East and beyond for this generation as well as the next. It will affect America's relationship with our allies as well as with our enemies. Other countries are wondering whether America will accept a flawed agreement that gives Iran almost everything it has asked for or will we, as the United States of America, stand strong against outlaw nations with nuclear ambitions and dreams.
As Senators prepare to vote on this legislation we should ask: Does this agreement do enough to stop Iran's nuclear weapons program? Does this agreement do enough to protect the security of the American people and our friends around the world? I believe the answer is no. It would be irresponsible to support such a weak, such a naive, and such a dangerous deal.
The original goal of ending Iran's nuclear weapons program was a good one, and I wish the President had actually stuck with that goal. I wish the President had done a better job of negotiating with the Iranians. He did not. During the negotiations this administration was far too willing to make concessions, concessions that put our own national security at risk.
We were in a very strong position during these negotiations from the start, and the Obama administration squandered the advantage. The President badly wanted to strike a deal with Iran, and that is the problem because President Obama has shown once again that if you want a deal badly enough, you will end up with a bad deal. The President fell in love with this deal, even though it is deeply flawed. And deeply flawed is a description our Democratic colleagues continue to make about this deal. The President cannot see the flaws that our colleagues on the Senate floor can see because I believe the President is blinded by deal euphoria. He is in love with the deal.
The agreement President Obama has negotiated will legitimize Iran's nuclear program. It will accept Iran as a nuclear threshold state. To me, this is inexcusable. It is not the deal the President should have signed. It is not the deal the President could have signed. It is not the deal President Obama promised he would sign.
President Obama once said that Iran didn't need advanced centrifuges in order to have a limited, peaceful nuclear program, but under this agreement his administration did negotiate that Iran will not eliminate a single centrifuge. It will continue to research more advanced centrifuges, and it can even start building them.
So how did it happen? How did this happen? On the day the agreement was announced, the President of Iran bragged--bragged--about how he had gotten the Obama administration to surrender on this point. ``To surrender,'' that is the language I am hearing around the State of Wyoming and certainly the language we are hearing from Iran: The President surrendered.
At the beginning, the President said Iran would only need 100 centrifuges. Then the number went to 1,000, then 4,000, then eventually allowed more than 6,000. When it mattered most, the Obama administration wanted a deal so badly that it was willing to concede on point after point after point. This proves if you want a deal bad enough, you will get a bad deal--and that is what we have here today.
The same thing happened with ballistic missiles. GEN Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States military, told the Senate Armed Services Committee, ``Under no circumstances should we relieve pressure on Iran relative to ballistic missile capabilities and arms trafficking.'' Under no circumstances.
Defense Secretary Ash Carter also testified at the same hearing. Now, this hearing, of course, was only 6 days before the final deal was announced by the President. Secretary of Defense said, ``We want them to continue to be isolated as a military and limited in terms of the kinds of equipment and materials they are able to get.'' That was 6 days before the final deal was announced.
So what happened? What did the President of the United States surrender on? With this agreement, Iran will have access to ballistic missile technology in as little as 8 years, even though the Secretary of Defense said no; even though the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said, ``Under no circumstances.'' That is when Russia and other countries are going to be able to start selling this deadly technology to Iran--and I believe that Iran will use it.
Now, this was a last-minute demand that Iran made, and it should have been easy for President Obama to reject it, but he did not. He surrendered. The President was so desperate to get a deal that he gave in once again. It is always the same story with the Obama administration: If you want a deal bad enough, you are going to get a bad deal--and they have. When the Obama administration is negotiating with countries that need a deal much more than we do, the President of the United States surrenders.
This administration has no red lines when it comes to negotiating. They will give away anything to get a deal. There have been too many concessions for anyone to be comfortable with this agreement. There are too many red flags. President Obama cannot see the defects that are obvious in this plan. He refuses to see what is so clear to the American people.
After this agreement, Iran will be a nuclear threshold state, and a military and an industrial power. It will have the money to support terrorists around the world--more money than it has had in the past. It will have the freedom to pursue its nuclear ambitions.
Even some Democrats who have said they support this deal are doing so with great reservations. They say they know it is not a good deal, but they say: It is the only option we have. Well, that is not a good enough reason for me to accept all of the risks and all of the concessions that the Obama administration allowed in this agreement.
The President says: The choice is the Iran nuclear deal or war. He has said it time and time again. It is fear mongering. It is not true. There is an alternative. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said so.
General Dempsey was asked about that at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee. In answer to the question: Is it this or war, the general said, ``I can tell you that we have a range of options, and I always present them''--present them to the President. ``We have a range of options.'' It is not just a choice between this deal or war. It is a choice between accepting a bad deal or rejecting it. If the only choice is to take this deal or leave it, then we must leave it.
The Obama administration doesn't want us to have a vote here in the Senate. The Obama administration knows it signed a bad deal, and it wants the whole thing to disappear from the front pages before it causes them any more embarrassment.
So instead of having a full and honest debate on the floor of the Senate, the President and the Senate Democrat leader are trying to hide behind a filibuster. That is not how the Senate should handle this important resolution to disapprove the Iran deal. Every Member of the Senate should be willing to cast a vote up or down on this Iran deal. We should stand up, we should represent the people of our State and this Nation, and we should cast our votes.
The Obama administration has made its arguments, and it has failed to make its case. The President has not shown that America will be better off with this deal, and I believe we would be better off without it.
We have heard the administration's excuses. We have heard all of the ways the final deal fell short of their promises. America can't afford to let Iran have the nuclear program that this agreement will allow it to obtain. We should vote to disapprove the Iran deal. The President should drop his veto threat. The President should send his people back to the negotiating table because this deal poses too great a threat to America's national security for us to do anything else.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source