WASHINGTON -- The Senate passed a measure Thursday to let Congress review any U.S. nuclear deal with Iran, a bipartisan move by lawmakers to assert their authority over foreign policy.
The 98-1 vote sends the bill to the Republican-led House, where Speaker John Boehner has said Congress should have a chance to block any agreement President Barack Obama's administration reaches with the Islamic Republic. Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas was the lone opponent.
"Our goal is to stop a bad agreement that could pave the way to a nuclear-armed Iran, set off a regional nuclear arms race, and strengthen and legitimize the government of Iran," Boehner, R-Ohio, said in a statement after the Senate vote.
The bill would require the Obama administration to send the text of a final accord, along with classified material, to Congress as soon as it is completed. The measure also would bar Obama from suspending congressionally enacted economic sanctions against Iran while lawmakers review a deal.
After threatening to veto an earlier version of the measure, Obama agreed to accept it after Republicans and Democrats agreed on revisions.
Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., said the proposal is intended to ensure Iranian negotiators know that sanctions relief depends on congressional oversight of their compliance with a deal's terms.
"It is not a prize for signing on the dotted line," he said.
The compromise bill, worked out by Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., and Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland, the panel's top Democrat, cut from 60 days to as few as 30 days the time Congress would have to review a final deal with Iran.
Although Majority Leader Mitch McConnell last month promised a "robust" amendment process, the Senate didn't allow votes on amendments sought by Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas, who are 2016 Republican presidential contenders. Both voted for the bill anyway.
The Senate also didn't allow a vote on a proposal by Cotton, which would have made any deal contingent on Iran's halting its support of terrorist activities that threaten Americans.
Rubio had proposed an amendment that would require the Obama administration to certify that Iran's leaders publicly accepted Israel's right to exist. Rubio said the amendment was important because easing sanctions on Iran will provide an influx of money that could fund terrorism.
"The prime target of the terrorism they sponsor is the state of Israel," Rubio said. "I am disappointed by the direction this debate has taken."
Cruz wanted to require congressional approval for lifting any sanctions as part of an Iran deal, instead of giving Congress a chance to block sanctions relief.
Cruz also accused Democrats of being "terrified" that votes on the proposed amendments would expose what he described as a comparative lack of support for Israel.
That country's leaders oppose the deal with Iran that the U.S. and five other world powers are attempting to complete.
"We should have insisted on amendments to put real teeth in this bill," Cruz said. "Ultimately, I voted yes on final passage because it may delay, slightly, President Obama's ability to lift the Iran sanctions and it ensures we will have a congressional debate on the merits of the Iran deal."
But some Republican backers of the bill, including Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who is considering a presidential run, tried to persuade their colleagues not to propose amendments that would erode bipartisan support.
The push to amend the bill also had been opposed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, an influential pro-Israel group that spent $3.1 million last year on lobbying, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington nonprofit group that tracks lobbying and campaign spending.
The group opposed amendments, like those offered by Rubio and Cruz, that would jeopardize bipartisan support for the bill, according to a person with the organization who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The measure "provides Congress a mechanism to assert its historic foreign policy role and review any agreement to ensure it meets U.S. objectives," the group said in a statement after the vote.
A framework agreement with Iran, announced April 2 by the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany, would curb the country's ability to enrich uranium in exchange for relief from economic sanctions. Negotiators are working to complete the deal before a June 30 deadline.
The U.S. and other nations negotiating with Tehran have long suspected that Iran's nuclear program is secretly aimed at atomic-weapons capability.
Tehran insists the program is entirely devoted to civilian purposes.
The talks resume next week in Vienna, with a target date of June 30 for a final agreement.
McConnell said the Senate bill "offers the best chance for our constituents through the Congress they elect to weigh in on the White House negotiations with Iran."
Added Corker: "No bill. No review."
The measure would bar Obama from waiving congressional sanctions for at least 30 days while lawmakers examine any final deal. The bill stipulates that if senators disapprove of the deal, Obama would lose his current power to waive certain economic penalties Congress has imposed on Iran.
The bill would require Congress to pass a resolution of disapproval to reject the deal, an action that Obama could veto. Congress then would have to muster votes from two-thirds of each chamber to override the veto.
Obama originally threatened to veto the bill giving Congress a say in the negotiations. Then he said he could sign it if the measure was free of amendments the White House believed would make continued negotiations with Tehran virtually impossible.
The bill also survived a partisan clash over a visit from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who stood before Congress in March and warned lawmakers that the emerging nuclear agreement would pave Iran's path to atomic weapons.
"It is a very bad deal. We are better off without it," he said in a speech arranged by Republicans.
A few days later, Cotton and 46 of his GOP colleagues wrote a letter warning Iranian leaders that any deal with Obama could expire when he leaves office in January 2017. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada accused the GOP of trying to undermine the commander in chief while empowering the ayatollahs who lead Iran.
In April, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee passed a compromise bill on a 19-0 vote. Obama withdrew his veto threat.
White House spokesman Eric Shultz said Obama would sign the bill in its current form.
But the spokesman added that Obama has made clear that if amendments are added by the House "that would endanger a deal coming together that prevented Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, that we'd oppose it."
Even if Congress rejects his final nuclear deal with Tehran, however, Obama could use his executive pen to offer a hefty portion of sanctions relief on his own. He could take unilateral actions that -- when coupled with European and United Nations sanctions relief -- could allow a nuclear deal to be implemented.
Information for this article was contributed by Kathleen Hunter, Angela Greiling Keane, James Rowley and Erik Wasson of Bloomberg News; by Deb Riechmann of The Associated Press; and by Jennifer Steinhauer of The New York Times.
A Section on 05/08/2015