1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Obama signs Iran nuclear bill into law

Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by carpro, May 23, 2015.

  1. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    22,620
    Likes Received:
    491
    Faith:
    Baptist
    http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/05/22/412372/Obama-Iran-nuclear-bill-law


    He had no choice. A veto would have been overturned.
     
  2. kyredneck

    kyredneck Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    11,176
    Likes Received:
    423
    Faith:
    Baptist
    AIPAC has both parties in congress thoroughly bought and paid for. Congress WILL DO what AIPAC expects.

    It'll be interesting to see if they can succeed in thwarting the peace process on the international level.
     
  3. kyredneck

    kyredneck Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    11,176
    Likes Received:
    423
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Sounds like the bill may not have been such a good idea after all, for Republicans that is:

    "...The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act that Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) negotiated with Obama comes up for a vote in the Senate this week. It is a terrible bill that virtually guarantees that Congress will give its de facto stamp of approval to any agreement Obama concludes with Iran.

    The reason is simple: Instead of requiring that Congress vote to affirmatively approve any Obama-Iran agreement before it can take effect, the Corker-Cardin bill allows the agreement to take effect unless it is disapproved by Congress.

    Big difference.

    An affirmative vote would have required Obama to persuade a simple majority in both houses of Congress to approve his agreement. If he failed, the agreement would be dead. Now, under a disapproval mechanism, the burden shifts to congressional opponents of the Iran deal, who need to convince not simple majorities, but super majorities, in both houses if they want to kill the deal.

    The bill allows opponents to pass a “resolution of disapproval,” which requires only a simple majority. That allows congressional critics to claim that they voted against the agreement. But Obama can veto the resolution of disapproval and send it back to Congress. When that happens, opponents need two-thirds of the House and Senate to override his veto. There is no chance that will happen. In fact, this is precisely why the Corker bill is so appealing to some Democrats. They get the political cover of voting against Obama’s Iran deal without being responsible for actually delivering an embarrassing defeat to Obama. That’s a “win-win” on Capitol Hill.

    Failure to override Obama’s veto would mean that Congress will have effectively assented to the deal, giving the agreement a congressional imprimatur. Obama will be able to claim that Congress reviewed the agreement under a procedure of its own creation, and the result of the review was that the agreement was approved for implementation.

    That is worse than if Congress had never voted in the first place...."
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...3be5ba-ecdd-11e4-8abc-d6aa3bad79dd_story.html
     
Loading...