this historic agreement, we were thankful to god that god was with us to, again, give us the humility to learn and the courage to act. and for that we should all be grateful. it's important to note that support for this agreement, as i have said, comes from both sides of the aisle, hundreds -- more than 100 former diplomats, democrats and republicans, ambassadors, etc., wrote, in our judgment the agreement deserves congressional support and the opportunity to show it will work. we firmly believe that the most effective way, mr. speaker, to protect u.s. national security and that of our allies and friends is to ensure that the tough-minded diplomacy has a chance to succeed before considering the more costly risks and alternatives.

36 generals and admirals wrote, there is no better option to prevent an iranian nuclear weapon. if the iranians cheat, as the speaker suggested they might, if the iranians cheat, our advanced technology, intelligence and inspections will reveal it. and the u.s. military options remain on the table. and if the deal is rejected by america, the iranians could not -- could have a nuclear weapon within a year. the choice is stark. what is mysterious to me, when our colleagues come to the floor under this agreement iran can be a nuclear power in 10 tore 15 years, so we should reject this agreement. no. without the agreement, they are a threshold nuclear power right now and could have a weapon within months or a year. seems to me the choice is clear

as the generals and admirals pointed out. it's also interesting to note that our distinguished speaker pointed out that some shortcomings in his view in the agreement. ell, that is disagreed by -- by the best nuclear physicists who wrote to congratulate the president on the agreement. as they wrote, we consider -- now, these are noble laureates, these are engineers, nuclear physicists who work and specialize in nuclear weapons, research and development. they said, we consider the joint comprehensive plan of action of the united states and its partners negotiated with iran will advance the cause of peace and security in the middle east and can serve -- this is really important -- this can serve as a guidepost

for future nonproliferation agreements. they went on to say, this is an innovative agreement with much more stringent constraints than any previously negotiated nonproliferation framework. that's why they were congratulating the president of the united states. i mentioned the prayer of father conroy this morning. i also this morning saw in "the washington post" that the prime minister of the u.k., david cameron, the french president, holla information de, and german chanceler angela merkel said, this is an important moment, these heads of states said, it's a crucial opportunity at a time of heightened global uncertainty to show what diplomacy can achieve. these heads of state went on to say, this is not an agreement

based on trust or any assumption of how iran may look in so or 15 years. it's based on detailed, tightly written controls that are verifiable and long lasting. we condemn, they said, in no uncertain terms that iran does not recognize the existence of the state of israel and the unacceptable language that iran's leaders use about israel. israel's security matters are and will remain our key interests too. prime minister cameron, president hollande and chanceler merkel then said, we will not have reached the nuclear deal with iran if we did not think that it removed a threat to the region and the nonproliferation regime as a whole. we are confident that the agreement provides the foundation for resolving the conflict on iran's nuclear program permanently. that is why we now want to embark on the full

implementation of the joint comprehensive plan of action. today, i urge my colleagues to vote in support of the agreement that enhances our vigilance and strengthens our security. i just always am fond of quoting sol men in the bible. -- solomon in the bible. he was uncertain as to his ability to be king in terms of his wisdom and the rest. and he prayed to god and prayed that god would give him the wisdom because david was such a great king and how could he -- said to god, going to be the king of your people. help me with knowledge. wisdom. with wisdom. christ -- excuse me -- god came to him in the night and said, solomon, because you did not ask for longevity, because you did not ask for great riches, because you did not ask for

vengeance upon your enemies, i will give you more wisdom than anyone has ever had and you will be renowned for wisdom. the solomon of wisdom which sprang from humility. e humility to pray for enlightenment, for knowledge, for wisdom, for judgment. and that humility is so essential in the job that we do here, that we don't have foregone conclusions. that's why i'm so proud of my members who spent so much time tudying this issue, not only reading the agreement and the classified sections and the rest but seeking answers, having information, seeking validation from generals and admirals and scientists and leaders of other countries as to what their actions would be should we unfortunately reject this, which happily we will not

do today. they had the humility to open their minds to learn, and when they learned they had the where to take an action some other of their friends may not have arrived at because they didn't have the benefit of all of this information. we know one thing, that we have to come together in the end, to protect our country and stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. . i say that i've had decades of experience track iran and its nuclear ambitions, longer than anyone, more than two times longer than anyone on the intelligence committee, so i know of what i speak and i went to the intelligence committee to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. that gave me some judgment as to what the president brought back

in this agreement. and still, i want to subject it to the harshest scrutiny as from my experience, if i thought that this was the best possible deal we could achieve. we mustn't judge achievements. -- we mustn't judge agreements by with they don't do but what they do do. this makes our country safer and our friends in the region safer as their own national security experts have attested. i thank my colleagues, i thank you for listening, for learning, for coming to whatever conclusion you came to but understanding at the end of the day we have a respect for each other's opinion and a regard for our responsibilities to our people, to people in the region, our friends in israel and also a tpwhrobal responsibility.

bop i could join the nuclear physicists in congratulating president barack obama for his great leadership in giving us his opportunity. today we will not just be making history, we will be making progress for the cause of peace in the world. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the entleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: i yield three minutes to the gentleman, mr. roskam. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes mr. roskam: thank you, mr. speaker, and thank you, chairman ryan. the leader first said we prayed for wisdom and so he he -- and so the question is she called us to act humbly, the question is, are we willing to submit ourselves to the collective wisdom of a majority of this

body and a majority of the other body? i would suggest a majority of this body and a majority of the other body think this is a bad idea. she also admonished us that we should listen and learn. that's not a bad idea. so let's listen to what's in the bill itself. the bill itself gives $150 billion in sanctions relief to the iranian government. then the question is what do we expect with $150 billion is it all going to go to pave roads? is it going to build schools in tehran? is it going to fix water systems? i don't think so. and neither does president obama. listen to his own words. let's stipulate, this is barack obama, let's stipulate that some of the money will flow to activities we object to. we have no illusions about the iranian government or the significance of the revolutionary guard. listen to the national security advisor, susan rice, when she

says we should expect that some portion of that money would go to the iranian mill tear and could potentially be used for all kinds of bad behavior we have seen in the region up until now. so let's listen to those words. they're clear. they're obvious. they're now -- so now think in term o-- in terms of percentages. is it going to be half? is it going to be a quarter? is it going to be 10%? is it going to be 1%? 1% of that money, $1.5 billion, doing what? fund hag mas. funding hezbollah. killing americans. let's listen and let's learn. now my friend from new york said this is definitely the policy of the united states. definitely. it's a fait accompli. there's no reason to have this discussion. it's all over in his world view. i don't buy it. i don't buy that for a second.

i'm not going to lay down here and let the president of the united states run roughshod in this probably, let's think about it. is this just a bad idea, or is this the worst bill ever? the worst idea ever? and i think it wins the worst idea ever award. it was a week ago when it was crazy talk at the idea that the president of the united states had standing, i will not yield, that the president of the united states has standing or that -- it was crazy talk a week ago at the house of representatives had standing in the courts and now you know what the courts have said? the house has standing. so the notion that this is all done and that this is just a settled case, it's not. so i think we've got to be very, very clear about what's going on. and we need to listen and we need to learn, and we need to vote no. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan.

mr. levin: i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. blumenauer: our speaker stood before us a few minutes ago and sounded a somber, serious note. i'm sorry the process we're going through does not reflect that somber, serious attitude. it's sad that it's come to this. a parody of what could have been a week-long, thoughtful, thorough debate about our relationship with iran which republicans instead have turned into an incoherent partisan shouting match. it ignores the realities, the complexity, and the opportunity. there's been no discussion, for example, about how the america -- about how america seriously mismanaged our relationship with iran since we helped the british overthrow their popularly elected government in 1953 and install the shah.

how we backed the murderous saddam hussein against iran which cost million os lives weak rooked the other way when he used poison gas, a real weapons of mass destruction. how we labeled them the axis of evil when they were working with us in a post-taliban afghanistan. it's amazing that the majority of iranians still like us. now, i strongly oppose the current iranian leadership. but for years, i've been working for diplomatic solutions with other countries because sanctions only work when other countries join us. well, they did. and we have an opportunity today to enforce a nonnuclear future for iran. the republican talking point is somehow they're going to get $150 billion. that talking point ignores the reality.

those five powerful countries that joined with us to help get the agreement, they're going to walk away if america walks away. then, multilateral sanctions will dissolve and iran will get its money anyway and nuclear weapons if it wants in a year or two. and it will be the united states and israel that will be isolated and the world will be less safe. these are some of the reasons that the major independent experts have said this agreement is the best alternative for the united states. not a perfect agreement. but the best agreement. let's use all of our time and energy to make this agreement work, strengthen relationships in the middle east to avoid more mistakes by the same people who gave you the disastrous iraq war. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expire thsmed egentleman from wisconsin.

mr. ryan: i yield three minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, mr. kelly of pennsylvania. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognize for three minutes. mr. kelly: i thank think chairman. -- i thank the chairman. this is a horrible deal. you never get what you deserve in a deal, you get what you negotiate. let me give you a contract between what two presidents say when they talk about deals. president obama said it's either this agreement or war. president reagan said there's no argument over the choice between peace and war. but there's only one guaranteed way you can have peace and you can have it in a second. surrender. now i want you to let your mind drift back to 14 years ago on the morning very eerily like today where america awoke and some americans were going off to work in the world trade center. some americans were going off to work in the pentagon. and some americans boarded flights for destinations that they thought they were going to get. to 3,000 americans said

good-bye that morning to their families and their loved ones, thinking they would see them again. never knowing that they would never be able to say that again, would never be able to kiss them good-bye, would never again celebrate a birthday or any other meaningful event in their life because of an act of terrorism. flight 93, and by the way, it 37 united flight 93, with passengers and seven crew members boarded an airplane destinned for san francisco. that is not where the plane landed. that plane is embedded in a smoldering cratering in the peaceful countryside of shanksville, pennsylvania, because of terrorists. the members of that flight crew and those passengers performed the greatest act of religious sacrifice that you can do. they gave up their lives for the lives of their fellow

americans. they walked away from a future filled with promise and decided it was more important at that moment to sacrifice themselves. how in the world can we sit in america's house and i speak to you today not as a republican but as an american. my friends, as we let our eyes fill with tears over the great loss that day, and as our ears pick up on the message from our enemies in the east, death to israel, death to the great satan, death to america, let us resound with love and strength and say listen never again, never again, never again. let those words echo forever and ever. not only in your ears but in your heart. do not cave in. do not sacrifice the safety, the security, and the stability of 330 million americans for the legacy of one man.

that is not who we are. that is not who we've ever been. and that's not who we will ever be. my friends, and i mean sincerely my friends and my fellow americans, vote against the greatest betrayal we have ever seen in this country. this is not a deal that protects america. it is unenforceable, unverifiable. this is a horrible deal. mr. chairman, thank you so much. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. minute n: i pause for a . i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. doggett: as the last speech indicates, it is hardly by chance that the house

republican leadership has scheduled these votes on 9/11. votes on a proposal, an agreement, to prevent iran from developing a nuclear weapon ever. the justifiable fear of another terrorist attack and the justifiable outrage about the terrorist attack of 9/11 have been exploited before today. they were exploited to justify the disastrous invasion of iraq. while few americans today will recall that actually after 9/11, there was some early support in iran against al qaeda terrorism, few can forget the of the repeated and rather deceitful warning that promoted the rush to war in iraq. we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud. nce again, the specter of this

mushroom cloud is being raised with those who would interfere with an international diplomatic success. an agreement that would avoid putting us on another path to war. and the same kind of folks that urged us to rush into baghdad are the same folks that told us back before we even had this agreement that it wouldn't work and we ought to begin bombing in tehran and the surrounding area. who said it will only take a few days of bombs and it'll all be over. the same poor logic that took us into a disaster in iraq that cost so many families. the ultimate sacrifice and the waste of over $1 trillion. this is not a debate about the trinh towers. t is -- about the twin towers. it is a debate that would be a twin wrong if we follow the same approach we took last

time. i've supported sanctions against iran. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognize for 30 seconds. mr. doggett: supported them at each opportunity. but this is not about sanctions. this is about a last ditch effort to undermine a diplomatic victory. those who reject this victory, are weak on alternatives. they talk about a secret, the biggest secret is what they would do other than bomb first and ask questions later. he director of the mossad, the israeli c.i.a. said we're putting in place a verification system which is second to none and has no precedent. ultimately, reason will prevail this week in congress the president will be sustained, and families here and in israel will be safer. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. reed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. reed: thank you, mr.

chairman. thank you, chairman, for yielding. i listened to this debate. i read this agreement. and i heard my colleague from illinois say something that resonates with me. we should listen. first and foremost, we should listen to the american people. they are overwhelmingly saying this is dangerous, reject this deal. let's listen to the leaders that say this puts us in more jeopardy of going to war. we all want peace. there's not a human being in america that wants to go to war, and to classify us on this side of the aisle as having a esire to go to war, shame. you get peace through strenk and you need to put the -- through strength and you need to put the american citizens

first. what about our four fellow american citizens that are sitting in iranian jail right now and the president said we tried to negotiate it but they wouldn't talk to us? well, then you walk away. at about the families that are represented in the $47 billion worth of judgments that have been filed against iran because they suffered terrorist acts at the hands of iran? and we're going to give $150 billion to iran without paying those fellow american citizens, those families who suffered and lost their loved ones? stupidity. american citizens always must be first. iran has made no confusion -- raised no confusion as to what its intention is here. it wants a nuclear weapon. it wants to destroy israel. it wants to destroy america. listen to their own words, and

if you do, we would say we want peace but it will be on our terms from a position of strength. vote no on this deal. nd i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from. mr. levin: i yield to another member of our committee, mr. crowley of new york. mr. crowley: i like mike, i admire him but i think he is it a disservice to the house and this debate to bring up the issue of 9/11. i do thank him for his honesty to say this is all about, having this debate today and this vote today to stir the emotions of the american people. my emotions always start on this day. 14 years ago i knew people who died that day. my cousin died. my friends died. i don't need to be reminded of that but it will not cloud my decisionmaking on this important issue.

today i stand in support of a joint comprehensive plan of action. this has been a difficult decision for me and i know it's been for many of my colleagues as well. there are those who came out against this deal before you even read it. for those that took the time to read the agreement and came to a given conclusion, you have my deep and profound respect because we both share the same goals. but after carefully studying this agreement, i believe it is important to give diplomacy the opportunity to succeed. the agreement takes important steps to address iran's nuclear program. under this agreement, both the current unirain yum and plutonium paths to a bomb -- uranium and plutonium paths to a bomb is put to rest and it will be centralized in a single facility that is pen trabble by u.s. -- penetrateable by u.s. airpower and it does not

constrain the united states by bolstering our allies and by pushing back iran's other nefarious activities. there is more we can do and must do including strengthening israel, jordan and our other allies in the region. israel is the only country being threatened with annihilation. i know that. o it needs and deserves a quat -- quantitative and qualitative military advantage. and if this deal doesn't work or iran's leadership somehow gets the idea that they can attack us or wipe out our friends, the united states and our allies will have the capability, the will and the power to confront iran's nuclear program and destroy it. we have the best military in the world. we have the best intelligence service in the world. and america will always be

prepared. the fact is no one here can predict whether iran will give up its program, not republicans nor democrats, and if they tonight, we have options. but we can do this and give this plan the opportunity to work, and i am prepared to do that. now, after all this discussion and talk about bipartisanship, a real profile of courage would be for one of you to support your president. one republican to stand and support your president. 13 -- i ask for an additional 30 second. levin letch i yield one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. crowley: 13 years ago i stood in the house of representatives and i gave the benefit of the doubt to the then president and he took us to war. i will give today the benefit of the doubt to your president to take us to peace, and with

that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman -- the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time i'd like to yield a minute to the distinguished member from the ways and means committee, the gentleman from texas, mr. brady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized -- will the entleman restate -- one minute . the gentleman is recognized. mr. brady: thank you, mr. speaker. i didn't take an oath of office to defend my president. i took an oath of office to defend my country. the world is a dangerous place and nothing makes it more dangerous than a nuclear armed iran. versus t a republican democrat issue. this is truth versus false. i read the agreement. i studied it. you have to ask yourself three key questions. does it stop iran's nuclear capability for the long term? no. does it stop the spread of nuclear weapons in the middle east? no. more importantly, does this

make america and our allies, like israel, safer? no. even supporters believe that to be true. no. america deserves, israel deserves, our world deserves an agreement that dismantles iran's nuclear capability, not just delays it for a small while, at best. that's why i oppose this agreement. it makes our country and our allies at risk. that's why i support stopping the president, suspending the president from lifting the sanctions in this agreement. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: could the speaker indicate how much time there is on both sides? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has 8 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from wisconsin has 12 3/4 minutes remaining. mr. levin: i'll reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time, mr. speaker, i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from illinois, a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, mr. dold. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for two minutes. mr. dold: thank you, mr.

speaker. i want to thank the chairman for yielding. and i've had an opportunity to listen to the debate and some of the things going on, yes, they're heated, but as we look at this agreement, historic agreement -- my good friend from new york just asked, will you stand with your president? i have stood with the president before, but i think it's also important that we take a look at this agreement. this is an historic mistake. this is one that will jeopardize the safety and security of the united states. and i want to echo that this is a bipartisan opposition, so this is not about left versus right. this is about right versus wrong. and ultimately when i tuck my children in bed at night, a 13-year-old and 11 yorlede and 8-year-old and i look in the faces of those that are here, these young americans and i wonder what type of country they will inherit with a nuclear-armed iran, for me that is unacceptable. our stated objectives, our goals were to make sure that iran never has the ability to achieve a nuclear weapon, and

yet this agreement, according to bob menendez, all but preserves it. a nuclear-armed iran, one that shouts "death to america," they want to wipe israel off the face of the map, this agreement, ballistic missile embargo is lifted in eight years and arms embargo in five, my friends, what do you use a ballistic missile for? i would argue it's not to drop leaflets, it's not for humanitarian purposes, it is to rain terror down on the united states of america. and for me that is completely unacceptable. and, again, i don't care where you come from, what district you're in. this is about, will we be safer, and the answer is simply no. i believe that this agreement ultimately will be an arms race in the middle east. we talked about france. we talked about the u.k. we've talked about germany. has anybody asked the neighborhood, the saudi arabia, the u.a.e., egypt or israel?

the answer is no because they're uniformerly against this because they know iran's ultimate goal is to not only devastate that region but to devastate the united states of america. this is one of the things that, again, must unite us. this is not about partisanship. mr. ryan: i give the gentleman another 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional 30 seconds. mr. dold: this is not about partisanship. please hear me. we don't want to bring up 9/11 in the sense we want to do it on this day, 9/11, but i do think it smacks the idea we never want to see that dirty bomb that comes into a containership, that goes into new york or miami or washington, d.c., because you know what, no one wants to relive what happened on that day 14 years ago. and yet if we do not step up in a united front and stop this, my fear is that we will relive that day again. that for me is unacceptable, and i implore you all, my colleagues, my friends, to

stand up against this awful, historic mistake. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i'll reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserve his time. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time i yield two minutes to the distinguished chairman of the budget committee, member of the ways and means committee, mr. price. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. mr. price: thank you, mr. speaker. this week iran's supreme leader ayatollah khamenei, the person who president obama and his administration said reached agreement and doubled down and declared the united states the great satan and he said, quote, after negotiations there will be nothing left of israel in 25 years and then jihaddi more alwill not leave a moment of -- morale will not leave a moment of sirenity. this is who the president of the united states say he's blindly trusting.

this is -- there are no anytime, anyplace inspections. there's no accountability for past iranian nuclear activities. conventional armament bans will be lifted. ballistic missile bans will be lifted. and to put it plainly, mr. speaker, this agreement paves a shiny yellow brick road to death and destruction around the world, not to mention an unprecedented nuclear arms race across the entire middle east. we should have made sure that not a single resource or benefit received by iran funds islamic terrorism. we should have made sure that iran publicly accept israel's right to exist. that genocide is unacceptable, that stated goals of wiping entire groups of people and nations off the earth is unacceptable. and at the very least, we should have made certain that four american hostages, including a christian pastor, being held in iran were released. of course not a single one of these objectives were achieved.

the administration thought that compelling iran to renounce nuclear holocaust or islamic terrorism or genocide were simply far too unreasonable to request. if this deal goes through, time will surely demonstrate that it will be a shameful stain in the history of the world. now, we pray that terrible ramifications do not come to fruition. however, if past is prologue, this agreement may very well make any further aion or concerns voiced by anyone too little too late. a nuclear iran spells nothing but disaster for safety at home and abroad. this agreement must be rejected. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield 2 1/2 minutes now to the gentleman from illinois, a distinguished member of our committee, mr. davis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. and i thank the gentleman for yielding.

after listening to this debate, i commend president obama and secretary kerry for their leadership in crafting the joint comprehensive plan of plus reached twheep p-5 one nations and iran. i do so because this is a plan which promotes peace and security not war or a continuous threat of war. yes, no agreement is perfect and no agreement will fully satisfy everyone but i can tell you that for me and the constituents of the seventh district of illinois, we say let's give peace a chance. we say, let's support the position of our president. but we also say, let's support the position of our experts. let's support the position of

our allies. let's heed the words of the prophets who say come and let us reason together. we shall all be utterly -- or we shall all be utterly destroyed by the edge of the sword. so yes, we say let's support the most rational, the most logical, the most comprehensive, and the most effective path to peace that we know. and yes, it's not about supporting the position of any single individual. but it's about supporting what is good for america. it is about supporting what a good to help stabilize our world. so we can exist with the idea that peace is indeed possible

and war is not inevitable. yes, i support the president nd i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time i yield one and a half minutes to the distinguished member from nebraska, mr. smith. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i rise today in strong opposition to lifting economic sanctions on iran. throughout august, i spoke with many nebraskans all across my district at public meetings, in addition to their frustration over the reach of the federal government, the most common concern they shared with me involved the iran deal. the ramifications of this agreement will impact not only our country's future but also, i believe, the stability of the world. i'm opposed to this deal and believe congress must reject it and allow u.s. negotiators to go back to the table. permanently lifting economic

sanctions on iran as this deal does would allow global financial resources to flow into a country still included on our list of state sponsors of terrorism. not only does this deal end long-held sanctions, it also lifts arms embargos as we have heard. the embargo ends in five years under this agreement and the ballistic missile ban is lifted in eight years. we should be mindful of our closest ally in the region, israel, whose leaders continue to warn us of the dangers of trusting the iranian regime. the president said our options are accepting this deal or going to war. i think that rhetoric is irresponsible. economic sanctions have served as one of the most effective peaceful methods of suppressing the iranian regime. when our national security is on the line, reaching no deal is certainly better than advancing a bad deal. congress must stop this bad deal and pursue a stronger agreement which enforces greater measures on iran and

ensures the safety of our country and our allies. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: how much time is there. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has 6 1/2 minutes remain, the gentleman from wisconsin has 6 3/4 minutes remaining. mr. levin: i yield three minutes to the gentlelady from michigan, mrs. dingell. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. ms. din fwell: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. levin, for yielding me the time. first, i rise with so many of my colleagues today in remembrance of one of the worst days in our nation's history. it is a solemn day of remembrance and prayer for those who lost their lives on that fateful day. as americans, we must be united as a nation in fighting terrorism which we know remains a threat every single day in this country. september 11 is a day burned in

the hearts and souls of all americans and we must work hard together, together, to ensure that we never witness such a horrific tragedy in our homeland ever again. we all agree never again. and i say that like my colleagues from new york, mr. crowley, as a woman who lost a cousin and a -- in a terrorist act and watched a woman i love never recover from her son's death. we all care. congress and this country as a whole have a responsibility to work with nations across the world in pursuant -- in pursuit of peace. my district is home to one of he largest populations of arab americans in the country who, like is many of us -- who, like

so many of us, came to the united states as immigrants. they are among the most patriotic americans i know. they are proud to be americans and have made numerous contributions to this great nation. and today, i ask you to also remember this. i rise in support of the joint comprehensive plan of action. like so many, it was not an easy decision and it was made with the most -- utmost respect for my colleagues and friends on both sides of the aisle. this process has shown me that no matter what decision one reaches on this issue, almost everyone shares the same concern. and they've been named and reviewed many times so i'm not going to go over them. but what i do want to say is, and we've said many times, it's

not based on trust. it's based on verification. and that's the last point i want to address today. congressional oversight of the iran deal will not end with this vote. in fact, it will just be the beginning. this effort must be bipartisan and i hope it will be divorced from the acrimonious politic that was dominated too much of this discussion. mr. levin: i yield the gentlelady 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. dingell: to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle let's work together for peace in the middle east and across the aisle. politics and rhetoric only complicate an already difficult decision. september 11 should be a day we used to remind us of what binds us together, the values we

share, the love of america that every one of us in this institution has, and let's work together to protect this nation we so dearly love. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time i would like to yield 2 1/2 minutes to the distinguished member from minnesota, mr. paulsen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognize for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. paulsen: several years ago, 400 members of congress in this body a huge bipartisan majority, voted to increase sanctions on iran because they recognized that smart, targeted sanctions would curtail the iranian economy and help unite the world against the iranian nuclear weapons program. desperate for sanctions relief, iran came to the negotiation table. i support diplomatic efforts, it was hopeful that the president would be able to bring back a good deal. in fact, 365 representatives, 84% of the house, sent a letter

to the president saying we could accept the deal that accomplished four things. this a long-lasting deal that ensured iran had no pathway to a bomb, that it fully disclosed the military aspects of its program, that we had any time, anywhere inspections, and that we addressed iran's ballistic missile capabilities and its destabilizing role in the region. sadly none of these principles were met in this deal. the president claimed thises the strongest nonproliferation deal ever negotiated. that isn't true. in our nonproliferation agreement with libya, we demanded they completely eliminate sentry fuges, halt all advanced centrifuge development, completely eliminate its uranium stockpile, give unfettered access to the iaea and completely eliminate its long range missile program and would ratify the safest safeguards known as the additional

protocol. under this agreement, iran doesn't have to do any of this. will a nuclear iran make the world a safer place? instead of giving the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism hundreds of billions of dollars and more intercontinental ballistic missile tknology and weapons, we should demand a better bay. the president should be working with congress in a bipartisan way because the world deserves a verifiable, enforceable, and accountable agreement that enhances safety, stability, and security. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: at this time i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from arizona, ms. mcsally. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognize for two minutes. ms. mcsally: mr. speaker, i rise today on behalf of those who do not have a voice today in this debate, that's the over 500 service men and women who died in iraq because of the export of vehicle-borne i.e.d.

technology by iran. by the brutal terrorist leader suleimani who used money from iran and who will be get manager money to export with the sole purpose to kill american troops and the thousands who are wounded. i deployed to this region six times in my military career. and our military is concerned about this administration turning their back on the men and women who died. and the strength that they need in order to keep that region safe and secure. this is a slap in the face to those who paid that sacrifice. suleimani is a brutal man, we have studied him throughout my military career. he's exporting terror all over the region, not just in the region, he's responsible for deaths in india and latin america. he's funding money to the assad regime. over 250,000 dead. hezbollah and hamas.

i said a few -- i stood a few weeks ago on the oming they have gaza strip where thousands of rockets were lauged last summer, killing innocent civilians in israel. israelis have seven to 30 seconds to run to shelter. they are funded and exported by suleimani in iran. we stood on the northern border near where hezbollah, funded by on -- by iran is stockpiling over 100,000 rockets. this is a dangerous deal. and this is not about a choice between this deal or war. those of us who served in the military, we want war less than anybody else. we know the price. we want diplomacy. those sanctions were working. we just cranked them up in the last 18 months. they are cash-strapped in iran. they are fighting in between their desires and different factions of how will they use that money to continue to move their nuclear program forward or export terror. we have them exactly where we wanted and then gave up. if we give them --

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for an additional 15 seconds. ms. mcsally: with the icbm embargo, it is going to be a more dangerous military action and more american lives will be lost. -- it is potentially war. i ask you to please vote against this deal. it is dangerous for the many reasons my colleagues have mention bud do it on bhf of those who dway the ultimate sacrifice. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has three minutes. mr. levin: are you ready to close? i yield myself the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: we've had a vigorous debate. this agreement is going into effect. as we have debated here this morning, that's a fact. and so this is the challenge before this body.

and that is whether we will try to recapture some real bipartisanship or if we essentially will forfeit it. there's work to be done implementing this agreement. that's acknowledged by all. and the question is, whether we will join together to try to make it work, an agreement that i support, but i think the same responsibility is incumbent pon those who oppose it. or as the speaker said, he says they've just begun to fight. that, i think, is the wrong approach in a very important way. both to this agreement but also

beyond. because there's work to be done in terms of efforts to reinforce security in the middle east, especially for israel. there's work to be done in the middle east and beyond in terms of fighting terrorism. there's work to be done outside of the middle east, everywhere, so i think it's a deep mistake to leave this moment here with this agreement going into effect saying the fight will continue. no, the fight should be with all of us together to make this work and to address the continuing challenges that face this country and the middle east and eyond.

so i close as someone with everybody else who worked so hard on this, who has come to a conclusion each on our own, but i think the tenor here sometimes is deeply troubling. and i thank the -- think the speaker's statement, the fight has just begun, over what? i hope not over the effort to continue the flames of partisanship that sometimes have captured this debate and before. we all took the pledge. we have a solemn obligation, i think, to work together. and i think it would be a deep mistake to have it forfeited for reasons of political advantage. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: mr. speaker, i yield

myself the remainder of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. ryan: mr. speaker, it's no secret that we believe that the president has exceeded his authority in so many ways. that he stretched the separation of powers on lots of issues. and on most of those issues i believe we can fix those problems. on most of those issues, whether it's regulations or domestic laws, i believe we in this body with the next administration will have the power and ability to fix this. this is one where i don't think we can. i think he stretch the constitution because this should be a treaty. this is an executive agreement. when asked why, they said we couldn't pass a treaty. so much for the constitution that we all swore to uphold. mr. speaker, i don't think the president's going to get the legacy that he thinks he's going to get or that he's hoping he's going to get.

i'd like to ask unanimous consent to put in the record a letter from 194 former military officers. it says this agreement is unverifiable. as military officers, we find it unconscionable that such a windfall could be given to a regime that even the obama administration has acknowledged will use a portion of such funds to continue to support terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. ryan: this is an agreement that waives the sanctions against terrorism. this is a regime that funds terrorism. it said nothing about stopping further terrorism. it lifts the bans on conventional weapons so they could arm back up. it lifts the bans on intercontinental missiles. the only reason you have an icbm is to put a nuclear weapon on it. it guarantees iran becomes a nuclear power. and it gives them $150 billion up front to finance it.

about a decades ago -- about a decade ago i was in debate in a tank graveyard, spent the morning walking through acres of destroyed m-1 abram tanks, humvees, mraps and they had the same kind of signature blast, a whole right through it, killing whoever was inside, our soldiers. then we went up to baghdad and met with one of our senior commanders, and we asked, what is killing all of our service members? hat is doing this? e.f.p.'s, explosively formed penetrators. he got one of them they conif i stated. he showed us what it was. a highly sophisticated machine explosive device with wiring on it that said, made in iran. brought by a gentleman maimed solely manny -- solely mainy. this is not a person for some person's legacy. this is a vote to put yourself

on the right side of next, your calls and comments, lying on washington journal. ,hen senator lindsey graham talking about the european refugee crisis of the iran nuclear agreement. debbie wasserman schultz, democratic committee, outlining the congressional agenda. >> this weekend, on the c-span networks, politics, books, and american history. 8:00 p.m.tonight at from speeches by two republican presidential candidates. first, scott walker visits reagan's alma mater. then bobby jindal at the national press club.

to profile interviews gop candidates, first, former new governor george pataki to ask his political career and issues shaping his candidacy. then rick santorum talks about his time in congress, is 2012 residential wrong, and why he is running again. on c-span2, jack cashel talks about his book scarlet letters. and sunday it on a p.m. on afterwards, minnesota senator amy klobuchar talks about her life and political career with the washington bureau chief. on c-span, tonight, on lectures in history, come to universities paul christopher anderson teaches a class on health or south carolina confederates used reconstruction in the week of the civil war. he talks about how the white southerners justified and

romanticized their defeat and motives for fighting. and sunday afternoon, the landmark u.s. supreme to court -- court decision. offer history professor peter wallenstein talks about the phrygia, loving versus and how it affected similar legal challenges. you have complete schedule and c-span.org. this morning, daryl kimball, talks about the iran nuclear deal in the state of non-nuclear proliferation. latest on the hillary clinton e-mail investigation. later, npr senior associate general counsel talks about a french privacy regulator that has ordered google to censor

search results in the name of privacy and the impact on users in the united states. washington journal is next. ♪ good morning. it is saturday, september 12, 2015. we begin this morning in the wake of a crucial week for the iran administration's nuclear deal. it began yesterday with the house rejecting a resolution to approve the deal. congressional republicans now appear unable to prevent the pact from taking effect. this morning, we are opening our phone lines to our viewers to weig in ono the iran nuclear deal. are you happy on how your party's leadership has handled the deal?