Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2015

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, there are a lot of things that go on here in our Nation's capital, Washington, DC, that don't make sense to me. One of those things occurred about 10 days ago when the Obama administration announced it would pay $1.7 billion to Iran in settlement of a financial dispute dating back to the days of the Shah of Iran. That $1.7 billion was a payment to Iran for $400 million that was held in escrow after the Shah's demise and fall from power, and the remaining $1.3 billion was to pay interest on that $400 million.

I think there are a number of reasons that this makes no sense. I will highlight the one that seems to me to be the least controversial or at least makes the most sense. We have American citizens who have claims against Iran. There are actual judgments entered by a court of law which determines that the country of Iran owes money to American citizens. The number that I was told that they owe is nearly $10 billion in judgments.

What makes no sense to me is that the Obama administration would agree to pay the Iranian Government $1.7 billion without concurrently resolving the issues of what Iran should pay U.S. citizens. It makes no sense to me that we are not withholding the payment of that $1.7 billion until Iran pays American citizens the judgment amounts owed to them for their country's terrorist attacks.

Why would we unilaterally pay Iran money that we may or may not owe them without resolving the issue of money that we know Iran owes to U.S. citizens? This makes no sense. We could at least have a broader conversation and discussion about this issue, although I don't know that it is necessary to go further with a discussion to reach the conclusion that the Obama administration should not be doing this. We could also have a conversation about whether this payment of $1.7 billion is ransom money. Was it paid because Americans were released from Iranian captivity on the same day? As the largest supporter and funder of terrorism and terrorist activity around the globe, we should have a discussion about whether we should be giving Iran any money at all.

We know that part of the Iranian agreement related to nuclear weapons has the United States releasing money to Iran, and we know--in fact, administration officials have admitted to it--that we expect that money, in part, to be used to sponsor additional terrorist acts. Well, in addition to the flawed, mistaken agreement with Iran related to nuclear capabilities, we are now providing Iran with another $1.7 billion to use as they see fit, presumably with the admitted ability to use that money to further terrorist acts around the globe, including against U.S. citizens.

We could discuss whether this is ransom or whether we should be giving any money to Iran. But on the surface, you don't need to go further than, in my view, what ought to be easily agreed upon, which is that no money should go to Iran until the claims of American citizens are paid by Iran.

I am on the Senate floor to highlight to my colleagues that I have introduced legislation exactly to that effect: no money to Iran until the claims are paid to U.S. citizens by Iran. I encourage my colleagues to consider this legislation and join me in its sponsorship. It is S. 2452.

I am grateful for the opportunity to bring this issue to the attention of the Senate--one more instance of something that makes no sense to me that could be resolved with a firm statement by the U.S. Congress: Mr. President, you can't pay Iran until Iran meets its obligations to pay what it owes U.S. citizens.

Mr. President, I thank the Chair.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source