we know is to pocket past concessions and then what do they do? they push for more and more and more. the separate arrangement agreed to between the iaea eniran regarding inspection of the facilities facility's a departure will almt certainly be regarded by that government, in iran as a president. their iaea access to future suspicious sites. in other words, you do not get access to this site, you will not get access to other military sites where there is evidence that the same type of thing has occurred. iran will not let international expect there's do these inspecting today, what makes us think that they will to theserusive terms agreements in the future, after sanctions have been lifted. that thettle doubt side deals of today will become

central to the provisions of tomorrow. this makes it imperative that these agreements are made available to congress. of thisker, 350 members house, democrats and republicans think we have a majority of the democrats. over republican. a ron's a ron's willingness to resolve concerns over its bomb work as we said in that letter is a fundamental task of their intention to uphold a conference agreement. that is why we all wrote that letter together, to make that point. the administration once took the same position that we are making right now as well. it gave that position away negotiations. it gave away that position.

aside agreements is critical to understanding whether iran intends to pass that test. we need access to those agreements. i reserve the bounds of my time. >> the chair recognizes the man from california. speaker, i give myself as much time as i may consume. after several years of difficult negotiations with a dangerous regime, the administration of every p5 plus one nations reached an agreement with the ron over its nuclear program. the primary objective of the united states is to prevent iran from ever maintaining a nuclear weapon. world's foremost sponsor of terrorism. this has been an overriding national security imperative of the united states for decades. as an american, and as a jew who

is deeply concerned about the security of israel, it is also intensely personal. believe our vital interests have been advanced under the agreement, it would be extremely difficult for orion to mask material to make a nuclear weapon without given the united states notice and time to stop it. still need to guard against any orion effort to obtain nuclear material or technology from militants abroad. that a be a problem the matter what. the agreement likely gives the world at least 1.5 decades without the prospect of an iranian nuclear weapon, and without going to war to make that so. that is a major achievement. the united states secures a number of important provisions in the agreement. they are not subject to a veto in the united nations. the united states and its allies

created an intrusive inspections regime. they applied to the entire chain of the enrichment process from the ground to the centrifuge. prevents a runy from obtaining a parallel enrichment process. in respect to inspections, i think it is important to clarify something that i think opponents of skewer. that is the fact that there are inspections with regard to their paramilitary work. inspections of no nuclear sites, and inspections of other sites that we may suspect they use in the future. the mechanisms with respect to each are different. with respect to the known it nuclear sites there are 24/7 eyes on their enrichment activities. we have the most extensive and intrusive inspections and a nation has seen of its nuclear programs.

we have unknown sites. at they are suspect, we have mechanism to obtain inspections in a timely way. certainly, in a timely enough weight that if they were ever utilized, they would be detected. finally, we have the inspections and to their prior military work. i will say this with respect to their work, those of us who have reviewed the intelligence know that we have an extensive bank of information about what they have been doing in the past. to the degree that we need a baseline to what their work has been. we have that baseline. i think that is a pivotal consideration going forward, as recently as yesterday the director of national intelligence stated that he has great confidence that we can determine if they fail to provide with the agreement. me, it is the size and sophistication of their nuclear capabilities that is the key

challenge. at that point it is the work necessary to produce the bond that becomes the real obstacle to a breakout. is the most challenging to detect. nevertheless, i have searched for a better, credible alternative. i have concluded that there is none. when it comes to predicting the future we are all looking through the glass darkly. if congress inspects a deal by much of the world the sanctions regime well, if not collapse almost certainly erode. this does not mean that they necessarily mash for a bond. but it will almost certainly move forward with their enrichment program. they have inspections and limits on research. -- in short a ronald have many advantages of the deal in regards to money and trade with none of its disadvantages.

and spec -- instead of rejecting the deal therefore congress should make it stronger. first we should make it clear that if iran cheats the repercussions will be clear. second, we continue to strengthen our intelligence capabilities. we should establish the expectation that well in iran will be permitted to have enrichment capability it will never be permitted to produce highly enriched uranium. and if they intend to do so they will be stopped with force. fourth, we will share with israel all the technology necessary to maintain its regional military superiority. and if necessary, they will destroy iran's nuclear facilities. finally, we are prepared to work with israel and our gulf allies to make sure that every action a ron takes to use its power for destructive activities will prompt a reaction.

we will block their influence. dayian people will one throw off the shackles of their repressive regime. and i hope that this deal will empower those who wish to reform the government and behavior. the 15 years that the disagreement provides will give us the time to test that proposition. then, as now if a ron is determined to develop a bomb. there is only one way to stop it. that is by the use of force. they american people and others around the world will recognize that we did everything possible to avoid war. i reserve the bounds of my time. >> gentleman reserves. chair recognizes the gentleman from california. >> i yield three minutes to mr. nunez of california. thank you for yielding. >> although the obama administration has pitched their

deal as a way to prevent the ayatollahs from obtaining a nuclear weapon. members wonderow how this administration can be so naive as to pave the way for an iranian bomb in the course of trying to prevent an iranian bomb. the answer is clear to me. the president is gambling. he is betting on the very act of that and engaging with a ron will moderate the regime's behavior. so that in a decade or so from now we will not have to worry about it anymore. he called his engagement with iran a calculated risk. indeed, it is a risk. as i said, the president is placing a bet. but why would anyone bet on the moderation of the regime. it has not changed one iota since the ayatollahs seized power in 1979. 36 years later a ron and the worlds biggest state sponsor of terrorism.

it is also responsible for the deaths of thousands of u.s. soldiers in iraq. of theas spoken ayatollah as possibly seeking to enjoy -- rejoin the community of nations. this is a lie to justify giving a ron a path to the bomb in the future. with their ritual death to america chant. i do not know how they can make it any more clear that they do not want to rejoin the community of nations. they want to blow up the community of nations. soon after the agreement was tweeted anmeini image of obama holding a gun to his head. i do not understand what is more clear that this regime could do to make its intentions clear to the american people. our president sees things differently. as he told the new york times that if the nuclear agreement is signed "who knows, a ron may

change. while consider this, if you're rolling the dice at a casino who knows, you may really seven. if you're at the roulette wheel who knows, it may land on your number. but when you're gambling, one thing is for sure in the long run that can see no always winds. -- always is victorious. this is not about a casino or about a gambler losing money. this is about gambling on human lives. u.s. lies and our western allies. with that, i yield back the bounds of my time. >> chair recognizes the gentleman from california. >> mr. speaker i am pleased to yield five minutes to the gentlelady of new york. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. thank you mr. speaker. aboutable people disagree

the merits and shortcomings of the comprehensive plan of action. >> and the strongest democracy in the world we have a sacred duty to uphold the high standards of debate and government responsibility. that is why i am profoundly disappointed by vitriolic personal attacks character assassinations on both sides of this debate. i am outraged by the republicans attempt to score political points on this critical issue of national and global security. to pursue wasteful litigation and to tie the hands of our president until the end of his terms are particularly , when the senate has indicated that it will not even consider these measures. i strongly oppose the irresponsible party measures before the house this week. as a ranking democratic member of the house appropriations committee and the subcommittee on foreign operations i have participated in dozens of

classified and unclassified briefings with the i ran administration. including with members of our negotiating team during the last two years. i have thoroughly evaluated the plan of action at least in july. thousands offrom thoughtful and passionate constituents. after careful consideration i will vote against approval of the agreement. sufficient safeguards are not in place to address the risk associated with this agreement. dismantle iran's nuclear infrastructure. first, in 15 years i ran it will become an internationally recognized nuclear threshold state. capable of producing highly enriched uranium to develop a nuclear weapon. with leaving u.s.

sanctions on conventional arms and ballistic missiles and releasing billions of dollars to the regime will lead to a dangerous regional role weapons race and enable iran to bolster has block, hamas and all his side. does note deal explicitly require iran to fully disclose its previous military work before sanctions relief is provided. anyntives will not have access to the most suspicious facilities. particularly the military complex with a process that lacks transparency and could delay access for up to 24 days. finally, there are no clear accountability measures regarding punishment for minor violations of the agreement. theecent weeks administration has responded to some of my concerns by committing to additional

security to vitriol and our partners. and to improving international cooperation on their destabilizing activities. i will work in congress and with the administration to implement these commitments to enhance non-nuclear related sanctions to establish stronger mechanisms to deter iran. ensure that they never develop a nuclear weapon. one of my highest priorities will continue to be the protection of israel's qualitative military edge so that our closest ally in the region can defend itself against all threats from iran or its proxy. in the same week my colleagues hold this important vote. vowed supreme leader again it to annihilate the jewish state of israel and to vilify the great satan that he

calls the united states of america. it is my sincere hope that we can work together in a bipartisan way moving forward the security of the united states of america and our allies depends on it. backe gentlelady yields the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. >> thank you mr. speaker. author of some of the iran sanctions laws that are in force today. the gentlelady from florida is recognized for two minutes. >> i think ms. used to beaker and i think my chairman for his leadership on this critical issue. discuss theto resolution. rand tol will allow a become nuclear capable and just a short order.

it will allow them to grow and expand its military. it will allow a rand continue its support for terror. these facts are indisputable. what is also indisputable is that the regime in tehran to test the united states and the west. the supreme leader of iran constantly insights chance of death to america and death to israel. are we not listening. and through the top process has bullet and hamas iran seeks to make this threat into a reality. the supreme week leader threatened that israel will no longer exist in just 25 years. because of this agreement mr. speaker the regime will now have the weapons, it will now have the capabilities to pose an even greater threat to us to israel, it into our interests in the region. giving a regime that openly

ands for our destruction the destruction of israel is insane. we are providing a ran a path to nuclear weapons and increased conventional weapons capability. not just bad policy. it is dangerous. it is naive to think that this nuclear deal with the rand will make us less safe or secure. therefore mr. speaker we must reject it. i think my chairman mr. royce for this resolution. i yield back. the gentlelady yields back the gentlelady from california reserves. pleased to, i am yield to the gentlemen from south carolina. gentleman from south carolina is recognized for three minutes. today in joint conference of plan of action.

plus germany. the european union, and a ran i support this deal because it is the best available option to prevent a ran from getting a nuclear weapon. all of us agree that it must be prevented. the opponents of this agreement say that a rant supports terrorism. i do not disagree with that. this deal is about only one issue. the issue that the entire world agrees is by far the most pressing. preventing iran from getting a nuclear weapon. it is precisely because they are sown a fairy us that this deal is so important. the interest of the design is and may remain a rand would be for more dangerous if they acquired a nuclear weapon.

this deal is the best way to prevent that unacceptable outcome. the opponents of this agreement say that we cannot trust the they and's to abide by agreement strict descriptions on the nuclear program. that may be true. i would not be supporting the agreement if it required us to trust the rainy and's. it does not. this deal is built around restrictive verifications ever devised. bomb,an tries to create a will be much more likely to catch them using the verification procedures under this deal, then we would be without it. put this deal in place. if we do catch a ran creating a nuclear weapon, all options will be on the table to stop them. but a military enforcement will always be a last resort.

i have not heard anything towards disagreement or present any realistic diplomatic alternative that would be anywhere near as likely to stop iran from getting a nuclear weapon if we reject this deal, military action will become more likely. whenever we send americans into harms way we must be able to look at them and their families in the eye and honestly tell that we have exhausted every other option. and the diplomatic options we must exhaust. this deals opponents present no other. saidsraeli prime minister and i quote "you do not make peace with friends."

we are now faced with three choices. it drastically increases the likelihood of military confrontation or nuclear it ran. , and i askeds deal my colleagues to join me in doing so. >> chair recognizes man from california. >> i yielded two minutes to the man for new jersey. global health global human rights, and the international organizations. you are recognized for two minutes. >> while it is previously unacceptable to have an iranian nuclear state, it is now inevitable under the terms and conditions of this plan of action. tragically the deal is riddled with stalls and gaps. taken as a whole, the deal poses a threat. it is a significant risk to the united states. not only is a ron permitted to

continue enriching uranium or previous nonnegotiable redline was known richmond whatsoever. after this agreement they will be able to assemble and industrial sale nuclear program once the deal begins to have the sunset and as little as one decade. make no mistake. they have a rabid hatred of israel. it shows no sign of abating anytime soon. iran has supported -- reported that their supreme leader said you will not see the next 25 years. adding that the jewish state will be hounding until it is destroyed. speaker the obama administration's previous pledge to the nation in the world we have learned that the iaea as it entered into a secret agreement that precludes unfettered funds expection. it also violates corporate law. we have not yet gotten that information. they are the leading supporter

of terrorism. they have provided tens of billions of dollars in weapons and warmaking material. by also criticized and he called to and the ballistic mission. he called that stupid and idiotic. and that they should mass-produce weapons and the means of delivery. they still want to deliver nukes. i held two hearings. on the americans being held hostage. america commodity. abuse,main in jail tortured or missing. why are they not afraid? i yield back. >> chair recognizes gemma from california. >> i am pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from indiana. a ranking member of the subcommittee on defense.

>> a judgment from indiana is recognized. >> i want to express my support the array nuclear agreement. as a ranking member of the house subcommittee i am acutely aware of the influence of a ran and its proxies on the security situation. however, despite my clear and deep distrust of a ran i firmly support the joint comprehensive plan of action given the improvement in works. this hard-fought multilateral agreement will limit their nuclear ambitions. establish a verifiable and robust inspections regime, allow for the timely reinstatement of sanctions for violations of this agreement. and in no way limit u.s. military options. i can argue that the agreement is not perfect.

i am frustrated at its limited scope. however, in any negotiation, especially one among sovereign nations each having their own economic and security considerations some compromise is necessary. critically, i believe the agreement reaches an accomplishment in the goal of preventing a rain from obtaining a nuclear weapon. i concur with the sentiments of my esteemed friend and former senator. i recently wrote that congressional rejection of their ran deal which killed the last chance for washington to reach a verifiable commitment. not to build a nuclear weapon. and, to destroy the coalition that brought them to the table. i believe it is vital for the duration of the agreement that the u.s. leads the community to maintain focus on iran's compliance and ensure that they do not undermine regional

suitability to the pathway. to accomplish this, we must remain steadfast in our commitments to israel and all our regional partners. constructively work to improve the security situation in the middle east rather than use all of their energy to undermine the agreement. we cannot rely on force of arms alone to make lasting stability to any region of the world. hope thation, i do the exhaust of a multilateral negotiations that led to this agreement will serve as a template for future u.s. and international engagement on other outstanding issues that have lead to instability and violence in the region i yield back my time. >> at gentleman from california. mr. speaker i yield three minutes.

the gentleman from texas, judge poe operations and trade. >> adjustment from texas is recognized. -- i think the judgment from california. judgment from california. this deal guarantees a nuclear weaponize a ron and our children's time. anyone who has read the array nuclear agreement act should support this legislation with force. the iran nuclear agreement act is to allow representatives of the american people, us to read what is in the deal before we vote on the deal. ronnuclear deal with the may be the most important international agreement our lifetime. is crystal bill

clear and defined what the president needs to provide congress before the review. of 60 days begins. the president is obligated under the law, let me read a portion of the law. that the president signed. here's what it says. that congress is allowed to have the agreement itself any additional materials related thereto. including an excess appendices side agreements implementing materials documents and guidance. technical or other understanding and any related agreements. the logic behind this requirement is simple. congress cannot review the agreement without having access to everything. we need to see all of the secret side deals come mr. speaker. testifying before the foreign america -- affairs committee secretary who is making the deal for us said that even he had not

see the secret side deals. the secret deals are not just technical formalities. the deals i'm talking about are the iaea agreement to elect a ron inspect itself. the facility is known as the place where a ron has worked to build nuclear warheads. there is nothing normal about allowing a ron to inspect itself. what this side agreement apparently does, if we ever get to see the whole thing. i was a judge in texas for a long time. burglar coming and saying i want burglars on my jury. but we will at a ron inspect itself? we want to see the secret deals. these revelations mail may be the tip of the iceberg. what else is included in the secret deals and side deals. we do not know because we have not been furnished by law with the deals.

it is the legal right of congress to know all of the details before voting to approve or disapprove the agreement. time we started reading all of the information before we vote i do not know of congress has learned that lesson. of citizens of this conga -- this country have every right to know about the deal. the president signed the croaker deal. it is the law, he has to live by it whether he likes it or not. >> time is expired. chair recognizes gemma from california. pleased to yield three minutes to the gentlelady from illinois. the gentle lady illinois is recognized for three minutes. 2002 the president of the united states and this congress voted to address the perceived threat of a mushroom cloud coming from a rack by going to war. that unleased massive

violence and threatens the world today. the obama administration faced a similar threat of the nuclear weaponize to run has chosen a different approach. the path of the promisee. the path of peace. of diplomacy. i'm proud to support his agreement. the president said "this represents a diplomacy that can bring about real change. change that makes our country and the world safer and more secure. --." deal that, the same stampeded the united states into war with iraq. they were wrong then, and they are wrong now. ron is now three months from being able to produce a nuclear weapon. the critics have offered no credible alternative. to a deal that blocks all the paths to a nuclear weapon.

deal is not perfect. a rain is a bad actor. -- iran is a bad actor. wait because they are responsible member. if that deal did not happen to because it never could have happened. deal greatly improves the outlook perceived by blocking all of their past two nuclear weapons. this is carefully spelled out in the agreement itself. a ran stockpiles of rich uranium will be reduced to less than one. the number of a ron's installed centrifuges has been reduced by over two thirds. and far from trusting a ron they are the most intrusive inspection regime ever an international agreement. yesterday from five of our allies in the p5

plus one. these ambassadors said that if the united states walk away, the deal collapses. a ron would be without any constraints to move ahead with its nuclear weapons program, all paths would be open. there will be no inspections whatsoever, no insight into their activity. the desire to build meaningful and international coalition would be eroded for the for seeable future. i viewed this upcoming vote on a ron as it one of the most important of my career, and my colleagues i would say that eschew for everyone. one of the most important of my life and for me the choice is clear. diplomacy over war. colleagues love to remember nothing is off the table. but, why wouldn't we choose peace and give peace a chance?

i yield back. >> gentlelady's time has expired. speaker -- i yield myself to minutes. >> part of diplomacy is making sure that you have verification. our problem here is that the iranians are posting right now that the u.s. is not going to have access, or any other international inspectors will militaryss to their sites. where they do this work. the problem is that inspectors do not get 24 hours notice. they get 24 days notice. they go through a process in which iran and china, and russia can block. the former head of the cia testified in front of the foreign affairs committee that we never believed that the iranians, and arise declared facilities whatever make its way into a weapon. we always believed that work

would be done somewhere else in secret. getagain if you cannot international inspectors into parts where they did that work, what makes you think what makes us believe that in the future we will have international inspectors once that is the established premise. go anywhere else, go anywhere else as hayden said requiring consultations between the world powers and a ron takes inspections from the technical level and puts it at the political level which he calls a formula for chaos. ambiguity, and doubt. we do not even know how bad the capitulation was in the side agreements. the capitulation that will undermine the ability to catch iranian cheating.

why we are concerned about the way this was negotiated. i will reserve the balance of my time. >> sentiment from california reserves. gentleman from california. let me yield three minutes, if i could to the judgment from kansas. the author of resolution for 11. thank you mr. speaker. >> we have a great deal about what we have learned. thank you for all of the hard work. related to his agreement. so, there are a lot of things to say about the iranian deal that this president has said. but this deal is very narrow. and very simple, and very straightforward. it is aimed to establish a simple -- it's as if the president signed something into law that he will fulfill the obligations.

the debatesned to today i can tell you that we have not had any members say that they have read the entire agreement. i suspect we will not. that is because there is no american who has read the entire agreement. the unitedsident of states, not the secretary of state, no secretary. no member of congress. no member of the public. no american citizen has read the entire agreement. yet we have members who say this is a great deal. how one could feel that way about an agreement. they demand that they see the text of bills that rename post offices. yet, this was a historic agreement and many of my colleagues are saying they're going to vote for it without even knowing what the details are about how we're going to verify whether the iranian regime has complied with this agreement.

i think that is deeply troubling. i think as representatives we have a moral obligation to validate what we are voting on. i think we have the president's obligations. overresident could turn every element of the deal. mr. speaker, in july senator traveled to be an up where we were informed by the secretary director of these two secret side deals. hey look to straighten the eye and said that is wrong. i think is impossible for congress to support the agreement. the deputy informed me that iranians have read the two secret side deals, but we would not get to. i've spent the last 50 days asking, trolling, demanding praying that this president would do what he is required to do, and what every member of congress is entitled to have their provide us with the deal. we do not have that.

the deal says that we as members of congress demand that the president comply with what the law sets out. show us the deal. allow us the opportunity to read the agreement so that we can conform judgments. the age for 11 makes it clear that was the deal, in exchange for not demanding that we want a simple transparency. show us the terms of the deal. the president could not do it. colleagues to my demand the secret side deals. >> are times expired. gemma from california reserves. speaker, i want to yield three minutes to the judgment from california.

>> i think the ranking member mr. ship for yielding the time. the goal of the international community and our negotiations with iran is, and has been to prevent them from producing and possessing nuclear weapons. by all accounts, a ran had already reached its own where it was perhaps months away from crossing that nuclear threshold. i repeat, months away. not years, months away. votes could be taken more seriously than one to halt nuclear weapons. that is why this congress should support the agreement negotiated to prevent a ron from producing and possessing nuclear weapons. we should both here congress against any congressional members attempting to fort limitations. hashe negotiated agreement provided for inspection and

verification a regime which, a ran had to consent to. it must now submit you that regime for inspection and verification is not just credible, it is enforceable. those who have conducted nuclear inspections will tell you that as those who deal with nuclear materials will tell you that, and as those about butting heads with iran, they will tell you that. respond shouldto iran decide to regress and its obligations with israel. nothing in this negotiated agreement is based on trust. penalties, they all are mandatory, and unambiguous in their terms. no deal is perfect. of ways toys think make the deal better. but thinking is not doing. speculation will not prevent them from reaching nuclear weapons capability. it should escape know once

noticed that every measure an economic station in place today has failed to stop them from getting nuclear weapons. remember, perhaps only months away from that nuclear threshold. it is time for america and our international partners to take this deal to a new level. why the united states, great britain, and germany and france and russia joined together to force and driver ran to the negotiated agreement. can we arehese days out of the names of those six countries together working for the same cause. this agreement constitutes a meaningful and enforceable check on iran's nuclear ambition and any intention they might cheat. back in july, when this was it musti stated that constitute measurable progress in all things. a driving the region and the world further away from nuclear armageddon.

the agreement meets that test and with the support of great britain, germany, france and even russia and china. we will hold a ran to that test. supportwhy we should the negotiated agreement. i yield back my time. >> the judgment yields. the gentlemen from california is recognized. >> i yield one minute. arrive inaker, i opposition to the deal. this deal represents a direct threat to the united states, israel, and the world. recently, i visited israel and met with the prime minister. the prime minister was firm in his warning. this is a very bad deal. it could result in grave consequences for the world. tost, this deal allows them continue to enrich uranium that can be used to develop a nuclear weapon. and thethis deal president's promise of any

inspection. to a process of that allow them to delight up to 24 days. third, this agreement would result in the comprehensive lifting of their quest for nuclear weapons. bottom line, this deal presents a far too many risks for the united states and far too many rewards for a ran. when the ayatollah chance death to america they mean it. that should cause serious concern for every american citizen. it is time for america to wake up and understand the danger and threat this deal prevents death presents tour security. i yield back. >> gentlelady yields, gentleman is recognized. >> i yield myself to minutes. first, i want to address briefly the very strange interpretation i think my friends are giving of corporate legislation to accept the arguments of the opposition to the deal. you have to accept the

proposition that the core of legislation provides an and aent between the iaea ron to which the united states is not a party. to which the united states has no obligation. and to which the iaea is precluded from providing to the administration. be a very far fred interpretation of the legislation. what's more, if you accept the argument that we can't have a vote on the agreement until we document between the iaea and iran, then why has the majority scheduled a vote on the agreement for tomorrow. it is inconsistent with what their own majority has scheduled. finally, i do not think anyone is full to buy the nature of this procedural motion or bill. no one expects that anyone who is voiced opposition to the agreement is somehow going to change their opinion.

if they have access to this private document between the iaea and iran. what's more, as we know the iaea enters into these agreements with individual nations around the world. so, this is not at all unique to the situation with iran. one final point i like to make. we are now well into the debate on the agreement. and for all the arguments that have been advanced as to why we should have concerns about provisions of the agreement or concerns about the behavior, many of which i share, there is one thing we have heard little about. the deal,pposition to and that is what is a credible alternative? i asked the question, what is an alternative? the answer, from what i'm able to devise from the scarce attention they paid, i yield myself an additional minutes come >> chairs recognized for additional minute.

>> as far as i concern from the opposition is this, this is how the alternative would work. deal, theejects the administration then persuades the rest of the world to maintain sanctions even when we rejected an agreement adopted by the other major powers, and either ones that explicitly that there will be no new litigation issues. somehow, we maintain the sanctions regime under this radical alternative. and, what a ron gives up in enrichment comes back to the table is to capitulate everything. fanciful, so far removed from the reality of the situation that it is no surprise that the opposition devotes very little if any time to discussing a credible alternative. indeed, there is no credible alternative. so, again, that is why i think it is so important that we focus

on how we strengthened the constraints. mitigate risks, and that is a much more path forward then rejection of this comments seen a ron going back to spinning up centrifuges, picking up where they left off at 20% enrichment and going beyond. picking up where they left off with 19,000 centrifuges. is that really the path we want to go down, i think not. i reserve the bounce of our time. exit dedman reserves. a judgment from california is recognized. >> yes, there was an alternative. i yield myself to minutes. there was a credible alternative. the bipartisan administration, which the administration blocked, legislation that would have put that additional pressure on the regime in a ron, knowing that the united states, knowing that countries do not have the option, and countries

around the world do not have the option of making a choice, when they have to make that choice between doing business with the united states, or doing business with iran, they have to do business with the united states. we put that billing to the senate. the ministers and blocked it. that's legislation would have ensured the type of pressure on a ron that would have forced the ayatollah to make a choice between a real compromise, real compromise on his plan to or economicweapon collapse. economic collapse for that regime. we would have had that leverage in that negotiation. they blocked that bill in the senate the last congress. frankly, that option is still available to us. but i will yield two minutes to the gentleman from ohio, mr.

ship. >> two minutes. >> i think the judgment for yielding. tomorrow is september 11, a solemn day in our history are thousands of americans lost their lives in the worst terror attack in our history. it is disturbing that we happen to be debating whether a state sponsor of terror should have a bright path to nuclear weapons at this time, but we are. i was a member of the foreign affairs committee for a long time. almost 20 years. i was a chair of the subcommittee on the middle east. i can tell you without any reservation that this deal with a ron is a disaster. it will weaken the security of our allies in the region. it'll make americans less safe here at home. through, iranoes will receive up to $150 billion, what a rontimes

spends on its entire military. does that seem like a good idea? we are talking about the words leading state sponsor of terrorism. this money will fund more and more terror across the globe and here my district is the greater cincinnati area. ge aircraft engines is headquartered there. dwight patterson air force base is up the road. they have been top potential targets, ballistic missiles since the cold war. to getal allows a ron more sophisticated icbm technology from russia. that will allow them to target not only tel aviv, and washington, in new york and cincinnati, this is just not's. happened to the anytime anywhere inspections? they are gone. it will take months to get the inspectors in, by that time they will have removed the incriminating evidence.

obama --m-line, the the obama administration wanted a deal more than the iranians did. this administration was willing to sell out israel and our allies and make us less safe at home. this is a lousy deal. it ought to be rejected. >> thank you. the gentleman yields, judgment from california is recognized. >> i want to take a brief moment to respond to my calling from california. that ait were so simple credible alternative with the passage of a bill in congress that had not passed before. through the mere act of our legislation to compel the rest of the world to join us in a new round of sanctions. we simply do not have that power. imagine that ao new sanctions bill will somehow force iran to come back to the table ready to concede its entire early enrichment program is simply not credible.

if that is what we are left with, we are left with no good alternatives. again, i think that is precisely why we need to move forward with the agreement that has been reached between the world powers and a ron. i'm pleased to yield -- iran. i yield my time. -- the iran nuclear nuclear agreement is i want to powerful military academic nations to reach a verifiable agreement that will deny iran a nuclear weapon. in past years, when politics was civil and for policy was bipartisan this diplomatic agreement would have been championed by republicans and democrats as a non-full liberation triumph. as it is today in great britain,

our greatest ally this agreement will prevent iran from developing a nuclear weapon. as an israeli intelligence analysis said "this is not about trust, or goodwill between states, or sides, it is strict inspection. it is verification regimes that will ensure the success of the agreement. and if iran violates the agreement, sanctions will snap back and the international community will take action. i strongly support this agreement. the grateful for administration's leadership." times calls the republican efforts "a vicious battle against mr. obama and unseemly spectacle of lawmakers siding with a foreign leader against their own commander-in-chief." i want to be crystal clear, i

support our commander-in-chief. the republicans and israeli proponents of this agreement are the same neocons who sold the war and a rack to americans based on lies and misinformation. now, what do the republicans offer as an alternative? nothing. they have no plan other than to kill the agreement which means that a ron will either obtain a nuclear weapon or the u.s. will go to war to stop them. let me tell you, i'm not interested in another republican war in the middle east. now is the time to put national security of the american people first, let's reject this republican gameplaying and support a tough diplomatic agreement that will stop iran from gaining a nuclear weapon. i yield back. >> gentlelady yields, judgment from california recognize. mr. shuster, judgment of the chairman on transportation. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to

voice strong opposition to this fatally flawed deal. by signing the nuclear agreement review act the president agreed to allow all documents, secret and side deals to be reviewed by the u.s. congress. once again, president obama has not complied with the law the land. he does not have the authority to a sanctions on iran. by lifting sanctions on the regime, a nation that finances has belied other terrorist over 100ll receive billion dollars in assets. it will no doubt continue to fund terrorist organizations at a greater level the they are able to do today. those terrorist organizations have the motto of death to america. have we learned nothing from our past mistakes? the same person that negotiated the deal with north korea also held discussions with iran. we must ask ourselves is the world a safer place when

unstable nations like north korea are testing nuclear weapons? responsibility of the united states congress charged by the constitution is national security. this agreement jeopardizes our security because i believe, as the prime minister of israel believes that this will in short that a ron will get a nuclear weapon. for the security of america and our friends and allies around the world, we must oppose this agreement. i yield back. the house approved the bill. it said the white house has not provided the documents on side deals to the nuclear agreement with iran and that the review. has not started. the chamber is expected to vote later today. a bill will also debate that would prevent president obama from lifting sanctions on iran. you can watch it on c-span at 9:00 a.m. eastern time.

c-span's coverage of 9/11 begins 8:40 a.m. eastern time. at the world trade center in new york city including with a reading of the names of those who died. live on c-span3. at 8:45 on c-span president obama and the first lady will observe a moment of silence at the white house. then, a ceremony for victims families at the pentagon. with vice chair of the joyce chiefs of staff. the american flag will be unfurled where the pentagon was hit on 9/11. onwill take you there live, 9:30 a.m. eastern time on c-span two. for the department of defense employees on c-span3. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> coming up next, washington journal will focus on the 14th

anniversary of the september 11 attacks with senator jones at the rand corporation. he will talk about the thread still face in the united states from terrorist groups. when 289 people died flight 77 crashed into the pentagon on september 11, 2000 one. on your screen is alive picture of the pentagon where commemoration ceremonies will be held this morning. "the washington journal" will commemorate 9/11 by taking calls later in the program. on this 14th anniversary, the house of representatives will vote on the iran nuclear agreement, that is where we will begin today. if you support the iran nuclear agreement, --