WASHINGTON – World-Herald Bureau – APRIL 23, 2015 — As soon as this week, the Senate could start debating legislation asserting some congressional authority over any nuclear deal with the Iran.
Expect senators from Iowa and Nebraska to support the measure — approved unanimously by the Foreign Relations Committee — even as some question whether it goes far enough.

“It really does not give the United States Senate the strong voice it ought to have in these agreements,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.
The legislation by Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., gives Congress a seat at the table in that it would require the Obama administration to provide information about any deal and how it was reached. It also would give Congress a path to vote on a resolution of approval or disapproval of a deal, something the administration initially opposed.
President Barack Obama could veto a resolution of disapproval. Because a two-thirds majority of Congress is needed to override a veto, that means Obama would need as few as 34 votes in the Senate to uphold a deal.
Grassley said he would prefer any deal be handled as a treaty, which would flip the Senate math. Treaties require a two-thirds vote to ratify, meaning that Obama would have to find 67 votes in the 100-member Senate.

Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., a member of the Armed Services Committee, said it was important that the Corker bill would ensure that Congress had access to all the classified documents connected with the negotiations, so that lawmakers could understand what was said behind closed doors. She said the administration agreed to sign Corker’s bill only after it became clear there was a broad consensus that Congress must play a role.
“The administration now realizes that the overwhelming majority of senators, Republicans and Democrats, are saying this and that they will need to comply with it,” Fischer said.

Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, also a member of the Armed Services Committee, said Congress ought to have more time to review a nuclear deal but said she expected to support Corker’s bill.
“Congress needs to be involved in any discussions that the president is having with Iran,” she said.
Republicans have sharply criticized the administration’s negotiations with Iran, saying the U.S. needs to take a tougher line.
Ernst said any talk about military intervention is “a long ways off,” even though some official assessments say Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in a matter of months if it chose to.
“I am about the last person that would just automatically send our men and women into harm’s way,” said Ernst, who has deployed overseas.
Instead, she expressed faith that continuing to hammer Iran with tougher sanctions would produce results. She said she could not say specifically which sanctions she would ratchet up.

Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., has been an outspoken critic of the administration on Iran. He supports Corker’s bill on congressional authority as a “small step in the right direction” because it would give Congress more insight into what was actually negotiated.
“While it is not enough in the case of a bad deal with Iran, this legislation would help Nebraskans know precisely how bad the deal is,” Sasse said in a statement. “Nebraskans know the difference between a negotiation and a shakedown — instead of beginning from a position of strength and preventing the threat of war, the White House has made dangerous concessions and seems ready to make a bad deal with the world’s largest state sponsor of terror.”.