Hire More Heroes Act of 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I watched in absolute amazement as the Obama administration attempted to justify what is clearly a misguided gamble and a bad deal with Iran. We saw the signs of how bad this deal was almost immediately, as during the same speech in which he announced the deal, the President threatened to veto any legislation that opposed it. I have been a business owner. When you lead with threats, you typically are covering for a very bad deal, because when you are building support for your product--in this case the Iran deal--you don't tell the folks you are talking to who disagree with you that they are crazy. That is simply something you don't do when you have confidence in the deal.

If you are leading with threats, you are showing your hand. The President is trying to bluff by holding a 2, a 5, an 8, and a 10, and we didn't even bring a fifth card to the table. I use a poker reference because that is exactly what the President of the United States is doing--gambling with our security, gambling with Israel's security, and, frankly, gambling with the future of the Middle East. He was also gambling that his National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, would not admit that the Iranian Government would use resources from lifting the sanctions to fund terrorists, but as we saw on CNN with Wolf Blitzer, she did. He was gambling that his own Press Secretary would not tell us that we should trust the Iranian Government because they would use ``common sense'' and use sanctions relief to help their economy and to help the Iranian people, but he did--even though we have seen no signs whatsoever previously that the Iranian Government cares about actually helping the Iranian people, and their horrific record on human rights has only worsened in recent years.

The President is gambling that he could use international pressure to convince people he was on the right side of the issue, along with Russia and China, and by bringing the deal to the United Nations before the U.S. Congress, that would somehow show Congress the deal was acceptable--another bad gamble, but it didn't work. The longer we have to study the deal, the worse the deal gets. The longer the American people have to learn about the deal, the stronger their opposition becomes to the deal.

There is not much good news as we look at this deal, as we look at the polling information 2 to 1 in opposition to the deal, the American people. Yet the President refers to those on the opposite side of the deal as crazies--referring to the American people, the vast majority of those folks around our country, so many of us, almost unanimously on the Republican side and even some good friends on the left.

As I said earlier, the President gambles with our security, and we have seen how bad his hand truly is. As I suggested, he has a 2, a 5, an 8, and a 10--a 2 because Iran will be able to double their oil exports and therefore double their oil revenues, increasing by more than 1 million barrels a day--in other words, $15 to $20 billion of additional revenue to fund nefarious behavior in the Middle East. That is more terrorism in the Middle East; a 5 because, without any question, in year 5 of the deal they gain access to more weapons as the weapons embargo is lifted; an 8 because in year 8 of the deal Iran will be able to purchase ballistic missiles; and a 10--yes, a 10--because in year 10 Iran can begin installing advanced centrifuges for enriching uranium. Simply put, this deal legitimizes Iran's nuclear program and guarantees a timeline for Iran to secure the bomb.

If Congress signs off on this deal, we can all take a big red pen and mark on our calendars almost the exact day that Iran will have a nuclear weapon. This isn't a Republican or Democratic issue. Just listen to some of the quotes from my friends on the other side of the aisle: ``The JCPOA, or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, legitimizes Iran's nuclear program.''

Another quote: ``Whether or not the supporters of the agreement admit it, this deal is based on `hope'--hope is a part of human nature, but unfortunately it is not a national security strategy.''

And, finally, ``To me, the very real risk that Iran will not moderate and will, instead, use the agreement to pursue its nefarious goal is too great.''

In what the administration would call an exchange for this, we see the economic sanctions will be lifted, arms embargoes will be lifted, and Iran will have more money and more dangerous weapons to route to groups like Hezbollah and insurgents in Iraq--both groups responsible for the deaths of many American soldiers. That is not a gamble; that is the wrong direction at the wrong time, the wrong deal, and absolutely, positively, unequivocally not in the best interests of this country.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source