TEL AVIV – Since Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., came out against President Obama’s deal with Iran, a number of other key undecided Democrat lawmakers have quietly weighed whether or not to oppose the international nuclear agreement in a vote next month.
Of those said to be on the fence, informed Israeli diplomatic sources have identified Sens. Claire McCaskill, Ben Cardin, Christopher A. Coons and Cory Booker as leaning closer to rejecting the agreement, which could jeopardize Obama’s major foreign policy venture.
Other senators said to be undecided include Bob Casey, Joe Donnelly, Heidi Heitkamp, Joe Manchin, Ralph Peters, Harry Reid, Jon Tester and Ron Wyden.
While he has remained low-key on the subject publicly, Booker held an off-the-record conference call last Wednesday with members of the New Jersey Jewish community during which, one participant said, he expressed skepticism about numerous aspects of the nuclear agreement.
Booker described Iran’s “heinous acts” in funding terrorism, warned more money for Iran could enhance the Iranian-backed Hezbollah terror group and used the call to predict the GOP-dominated House and Senate would vote against the agreement, a participant told the New Jersey Jewish News website.
If Obama vetoes the vote, two-thirds of either chamber of Congress would be need to override the president, which Booker warned could impact the prestige of the presidency and the country.
The report prompted a statement from Booker’s office in which the senator explained, “My position has not wavered: A nuclear-armed Iran is an unacceptable threat to American security, to the safety of our allies, and to Middle East stability.
“That’s why the most important question that needs to be asked and answered when evaluating this deal is whether it will credibly prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”
Booker added: “I continue to carefully weigh the details of this agreement in consultation with experts in both classified and unclassified settings to determine whether America’s security interests are advanced by it. My sincere hope is that they are, but I will hold this deal to a very high standard and in reaching any conclusion will participate in the rigorous congressional scrutiny a deal of this magnitude warrants.”
‘Lobbied on all sides’
Meanwhile, Cardin, the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is also inching closer to opposing the deal.
“He is certainly being lobbied on all sides,” Cardin’s spokeswoman, Sue Walitsky, told the Huffington Post. “He has joked he has talked to the president more in the last few months than all presidents before that combined.”
Walitsky said Cardin’s decision probably won’t be made until after Labor Day.
Diplomatic sources here also said McCaskill is moving closer to opposition.
She indicated support for the agreement, however, in an appearance on NBC’s “Meet The Press” last Sunday.
“It’s not a perfect deal,” she said. “Obviously, we don’t trust Iran. But I think too many people are judging this deal against the status quo and not what the new situation would be on the world stage,” referring to how the international community would act if Congress overrides a presidential veto.
She continued, “Remember the world is united in this deal … it’s going to have to be a status quo where the rest of the world also stays united or the sanctions regime falls apart.”
However, McCaskill allowed, “I hope that all of my colleagues are doing what I’m doing, and that is doing our homework.”
And she told Yahoo News she has concerns about the deal.
Coons is also getting closer to the “no” camp, sources said. A member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Coons told the Washington Post last week regarding the text of the nuclear deal, “I will tell you, my gut response at several places has been grave concern.
“Your job is to read it through as closely as you can … because no one ever pulls that document out unless there’s a problem,” he said.
