the gentleman from new york, mr. engel. mr. engel: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. nadler. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york for three minutes. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of the resolution of approval of the joint comprehensive plan of action. throughout this debate, there have been acquisitions questioning the motives and loyalties of members in making this decision. it is precisely because i believe this agreement is in the interest of the united states and because i've been a strong supporter of israel my entire life that i am supporting the iran nuclear agreement. this must not be a vote of politics but of conscience. i for one could not hi with myself if i voted in a way that i believe would put the lives of american citizens and israelis at greater risk of an iranian knew leer bomb. my priority and overriding idea in this is prevent iran from obtain agnew clear bomb. the interest of the united states and israel in this respect are ident

the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. engel. mr. engel: thank you, mr. speaker. it's my pleasure to yield four minutes to the gentleman from california, a very valued member of our committee and one of the subcommittee ranking members, mr. sherman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute -- mr. engel: four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: four minutes. mr. chairman, when i came to this house in 1997, a few months after i served on the foreign affairs committee, i said back then that the iran nuclear program was the greatest single threat to the security of americans. it was true then. it's true now. on july 14, a few hours after the deal was published, i came to this floor and said that the -- what this house ought to do is consider a resolution of proval of the nuclear deal and to vote it down by a large vote. that is exactly what we will do tomorrow morning. let me go through a number of oints that opponents and proponents of this deal can both agree on. the first is this resolution is quite a bit diffe

mr. engel. mr. engel: it's my pleasure now to yield four minutes to the gentleman from florida, very important member of the committee, the ranking member of the middle east and north africa subcommittee, the gentleman from florida, mr. deutch, four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for four minutes. mr. deutch: i thank the ranking member for yielding. i thank the chairman for his leadership in the committee. there's been a lot of points made during this debate. i would like to set some context for the rest of the evening. iran's regime is anti-american and anti--israel and violate the human rights of their hem. iran's support for terrorists has led directly to the deaths of american citizens and works to destabilize the middle east and vows to destroy israel and responsible for the deaths of civilians and members of the military from beirut to argentina and assisted in assad's slaughter of 300,000 of his own people. as we gather here today, four are in iran h

mr. engel: madam speaker, i rise in opposition to this bill. we're here because some have chosen to reignite the same tired battles of years' past and bring our government to the brink of shutdown. i should not be deciding what's best for a woman's health. she should and her doctors should. that we're even having this debate based on contrived, substantiated -- unsubstantiated allegations about an organization that provides critical care to more than two million americans is not only outrageous, it's downright irresponsible. more than half of planned parenthood centers are in rural or medically underserved areas where access to health care is already too limited. yet, my colleagues want to make it even harder for women and men to access h.i.v. and s.t.d. tests, breast cancer screening, cervical skin cancer screenings and other life-saving services. this attempt to demonize planned parenthood is disgraceful and, again, it is important to underscore that federal insurance coverage of abortion is already restricted. so to defund planned parenthood

and this goes to the issue that i and mr. engel and my committee brought up in the prior congress. when we suggested that if we had additional leverage in iran, on iran, if we had passed that legislation which would have cut iran's access, you know, to its financial sector and actually give the ayatollah that tough choice between real compromise on his nuclear program or economic collapse, that that was the leverage we needed. at a time when iran was fighting a real financial problem, with hyperinflation, very high unemployment, the price of oil going down, that was the time to leverage. but the administration did not want to put that additional leverage on and despite a bipartisan vote of 400-20 in the house, they blocked that legislation in the senate. so i think we lost our opportunity to leverage for what we needed in the agreement. mr. cole: i'm going to yield back time. ms. slaughter: before you yield back, would you yield to me for a second? i think i've got the answer to one ofy your questions. my -- one of your questions. my staff has given this to me. about the question a

mr. engel: madam speaker, i rise in opposition to this bill. we're here because some have chosen to reignite the same tired battles of years' past and bring our government to the brink of shutdown. i should not be deciding what's best for a woman's health. she should and her doctors should. that we're even having this debate based on contrived, substantiated -- unsubstantiated allegations about an organization that provides critical care to more than two million americans is not only outrageous, it's downright irresponsible. more than half of planned parenthood centers are in rural or medically underserved areas where access to health care is already too limited. yet, my colleagues want to make it even harder for women and men to access h.i.v. and s.t.d. tests, breast cancer screening, cervical skin cancer screenings and other life-saving services. this attempt to demonize planned parenthood is disgraceful and, again, it is important to underscore that federal insurance coverage of abortion is already restricted. so to defund planned parenthood

eliot engel: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to go back to 10 years. after the 15 years, they are a legitimized state. that means they can produce weapons grade enriched uranium without limitation. you can say they are already at that point now. why would we not try to negotiate a deal where they cannot have those things in 15 years. i also want to mention that a nuclear agreement does not whitewash the fact that iran continues to maintain a destabilizing sector in the region and continues to contribute to terrorism across the globe. the concern is that the funding of terrorism will continue to affect them in a existential way. one of the issues i have had with this agreement was from day one, it limits to their nuclear program. with this agreement, how i look at it, the financing of terrorism will continue and could become much worse. the ride many in revolutionary guard corps could take advantage of any sanctions relief. simply put, money is fudgable. how specifically will we work with our allies to limit the windfall and to protect our allies like i

mr. chairman. i would just make the observation that congress registered its concerns very early in this process. and in a bipartisan way. because if we think back to the legislate -- legislation that i and eliot engel originally authored and tried to push in terms of the negotiation, that legislation which passed this house 400-20 and then was blocked over in the senate at the request of the administration and could not come up, that would have given the ayatollah a choice between economic collapse or real compromise on his nuclear program. and i want to get to this point. that the president offers a false choice between this agroment or war.

engel has been a tireless partner in this. the bipartisan way in which the committee has approached this issue wouldn't surprise mr. collins or judge hastings. we've kept to our collaborate roots since the members left the committee. and while we strive to present a united front to the world, we can't always agree. mr. chairman, i don't relish bringing this resolution to the floor. we all wanted these negotiations to succeed. but i'm afraid that this agreement not only comes up short, it is fatally flawed. and, indeed, it is dangerous. a few key concerns we've heard from the experts in front of our committee. first, iran is not required to dismantle key bomb-making technology. second, iran is permitted a vast enrichment capacity, reversing decades of bipartisan nonproliferation policy that never imagined endorsing this type of nuclear infrastructure for any country, never mind a country like iran. and iran is allowed to continue its research and development to gain an industrial scale nuclear program once this agreement begins to expire in as little as ten years. ten years is a flash in time. and then the iranian o

engel has been a tireless partner in this. the bipartisan way in which the committee has approached this issue wouldn't surprise mr. collins or judge hastings. we've kept to our collaborative roots since those members left the committee. while we strive to present a united front to the world, we can't always agree. mr. chairman, i don't relish bringing this to the floor, we all wanted the negotiations to succeed. i'm afraid this agreement not only comes up short, it is fatally flawed. indeeding it is dangerous. a few key concerns we have heard from experts incommittee. first, iran is not required to dismantle key bomb-making technology. second, iran is permitted a vast enrichment capacity, reversing decades of bipartisan, nonproliferation policy that never imagined endorsing this type of nuclear infrastructure for any country. never mind the country like iran. and, iran is allowed to continue ts research and development to gain an industrial scale nuclear program once this agreement begins to expire in as little as 10 years. 10 years is a flash in time. and then the iranian obligations start to unwind. i just don't

engel has been a tireless partner in this. the bipartisan way in which the committee has approached this issue wouldn't surprise mr. collins or judge hastings. we've kept to our collaborative roots since those members left the committee. and while we strive to present a united front to the world, we can't always agree. mr. chairman, i don't relish bringing this resolution to the floor. we all wanted these negotiations to succeed, but i'm afraid that this agreement not only comes up short, it is fatally flawed. and indeed, it is dangerous. a few key concerns we heard from the experts in front of our committee -- first, iran is not required to dismantle key bomb making technology. second, iran is permitted a vast enrichment capacity, reversing decades of bipartisan nonproliferation policy that never imagined endorsing this type of nuclear infrastructure for any country. never mind a country like iran. and iran is allowed to continue its research and development to gain an industrial scale nuclear program once this agreement begins to expire in as little as 10 years. 10 years is a flash in time and then the -- it star

engel has been a tireless partner in this. the bipartisan way in which the committee has approached this issue wouldn't surprise mr. collins or judge hastings. we've kept to our collaborate roots since the members left the committee. and while we strive to present a united front to the world, we can't always agree. mr. chairman, i don't relish bringing this resolution to the floor. we all wanted these negotiations to succeed. but i'm afraid that this agreement not only comes up short, it is fatally flawed. and, indeed, it is dangerous. a few key concerns we've heard from the experts in front of our committee. first, iran is not required to dismantle key bomb-making technology. second, iran is permitted a vast enrichment capacity, reversing decades of bipartisan nonproliferation policy that never imagined endorsing this type of nuclear infrastructure for any country, never mind a country like iran. and iran is allowed to continue its research and development to gain an industrial scale nuclear program once this agreement begins to expire in as little as ten years. ten years is a flash in time. and then the iranian o