CodePink, Women for Peace & Just Foreign Policy & The Daily Kos & The Washington Post – 2014-01-21 00:24:14
Sign the Petition to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
The Committee to Say No to Iran Sanctions / CodePink, Women for Peace
“Help prevent a war on Iran! Sign CODEPINK’s petition urging Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to reject sanctions bill S.1881 — legislation that President Obama calls a “march to war” because it will sabotage current nuclear talks.”
— Todd Gitlin
We urge you stand firm against the Iran sanctions bill S.1881 and to keep it off the Senate floor. This bill would blow up the successful nuclear talks with Iran. President Obama even called it a “march to war”! We applaud your efforts thus far to stop S. 1881 from coming to a vote and we ask that you stay strong against it.
Senators Kirk, Schumer, and Menendez have sponsored an AIPAC*-written bill S. 1881 that will impose new sanctions on Iran. The Administration has said this bill will kill diplomacy with Iran and President Obama has called it a “march to war” since it will effectively end nuclear talks.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can stop this bill by not allowing it to come up for a vote. Don’t undermine this golden chance for diplomacy to work; ask Senate Majority Leader Reid to keep the bill off the floor!
* AIPAC stands for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which is self-identified as ‘America’s pro-Israel lobby.’
Don’t Help GOP Push for Iran War
Robert Naiman, Megan Iorio, and Chelsea Mozen / Just Foreign Policy
The Huffington Post  has reported that House Democratic whip Steny Hoyer, the number two House Democrat, has been in talks with House Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor on introducing a bill that would sabotage President Obama’s diplomatic engagement with Iran.
As the White House [ See story below], the Senate Democratic leadership , and the US intelligence community  have said, blowing up diplomacy with Iran would put the US on a path to war.
Democratic House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer shouldn’t help Republicans who are trying to sabotage President Obama’s diplomacy with Iran and put the US on a path to war.
Steny Hoyer must answer the question: “Which side are you on?” Is he with the President and diplomacy, or is he with the Republicans and war?
ACTION: Tell Steny Hoyer to back the President’s diplomacy with Iran and to stop helping GOP efforts to promote war by signing our petition to Hoyer and the House Democratic leadership
Tell Steny Hoyer to Stop Helping GOP Efforts
To Blow Up Diplomacy with Iran and Put Us on a Path to War
To sign on, click here.
To be delivered to:
Rep. George Miller (CA-11), Rep. Nancy Pelosi (CA-12), Rep. Henry Waxman (CA-33), Rep. Xavier Becerra (CA-34), Rep. Linda Sanchez (CA-38), Rep. Maxine Waters (CA-43), Rep. Steny Hoyer (MD-5), Rep. Elijah Cummings (MD-7), Rep. Chris Van Hollen (MD-8), Rep. Mike Michaud (ME-2), Rep. Sandy Levin (MI-9), Rep. John Conyers (MI-13), Rep. Collin Peterson (MN-7), Rep. Bennie Thompson (MS-2), Rep. Nydia Velazquez (NY-7), Rep. Joseph Crowley (NY-14), Rep. Eliot Engel (NY-16), Rep. Nita Lowey (NY-17), Rep. Louise Slaughter (NY-25), Rep. Peter DeFazio (OR-4), Rep. Robert Brady (PA-1), Rep. James Clyburn (SC-6), Rep. Eddie Johnson (TX-30), Rep. Adam Smith (WA-9), Rep. Nick Rahall (WV-3), and President Barack Obama
1. “Debbie Wasserman Schultz Privately Urging House Democrats To Oppose New Iran Sanctions,” Ryan Grim and Jennifer Bendery, Huffington Post, January 16, 2014,
2. “10 Democratic Committee Chairs Warn Menendez’s Iran Sanction Bill Could Blow Up Negotiations,” Ryan Grim, Huffington Post, 12/19/2013,
3. Letter to Harry Reid, Senator Dianne Feinstein et al, December 18, 2013,
Tell Harry Reid to Stand Strong against Pro-war Senators
The Daily Kos
59 pro-war senators are pushing a bill that could undermine negotiations for a peaceful solution to Iran’s nuclear program — and right now, Harry Reid is the only thing stopping them.
Here’s the whole story: President Obama is trying to negotiate a peaceful solution to Iran’s nuclear program, but a bill from Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) forcing devastating new sanctions against Iran could undermine those negotiations and force military action against Iran.
Even worse: 58 other senators — including 15 other Democrats — have signed onto Menendez’s bill as cosponsors.
Right now, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is the only thing stopping this bill from passing. As majority leader, he’s kept this bill from coming to a vote on the floor of the Senate — effectively keeping negotiations alive and keeping war off the table for now.
White House to Senate Dems:
Your Iran Sanctions Bill Makes War More Likely
Greg Sargent / The Washington Post
WASHINGTON, DC (December 19, 2013) — With Senate Dems increasingly likely to introduce and even vote on a bill imposing new sanctions on Iran, the White House is escalating its behind-the-scenes pressure on them to hold off, warning them that in moving such a measure, they are making war with Iran more likely.
“Members of Congress pressing for this bill are effectively choosing to close the door on diplomacy, making it far more likely that we’ll be left only with a military option,” one senior administration official tells me, characterizing the message that’s being delivered directly to Senators. “You close the door on diplomacy, and you’re left only with a choice between a possible military option or Iran steadily advancing its nuclear program.”
National Journal reported today that Senator Bob Menendez, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and other Democrats, along with GOP Senator Mark Kirk, may introduce a bill imposing new sanctions on Iran as early as today.
As NJ notes, this would set up the bill to be voted on when the Senate returns in January, and would represent a “bold act of defiance against the administration, which was still begging lawmakers this week to sit back and wait to see whether a comprehensive agreement can be reached.”
The bill Dems may introduce would impose sanctions after the six month deadline in the current, temporary deal, and it would probably have flexibility built in so the White House can delay the sanctions for limited periods, if both sides think a deal is within reach and want to keep talking.
Democrats have argued that passing a sanctions bill now would give the White House the flexibility it wants, while also helping the prospects for a longer term deal, by dangling the threat of sanctions later, to increase pressure on Iran.
But the administration has told these Democrats — publicly and privately — that their bill does not give them the flexibility they need and that they don’t need the added pressure.
They’ve also said passing a bill now that takes hold in six months would not have a materially different impact than waiting six months before passing one would, even as it could also allow Iran — and the US’s negotiating partners — to argue that the US is not negotiating in good faith.
“It is not necessary for Congress to pass this bill, because we are enforcing existing sanctions and can move to sanctions if negotiations don’t succeed or if Iran cheats,” the senior administration official says. “The fact is, passing new sanctions now would split the international community, embolden Iranian hard-liners, and likely derail any prospect of a diplomatic resolution.”
The push for a new sanctions bill is also splitting Democrats. While Senators like Menendez and Chuck Schumer support such a bill, others oppose this course of action, including Banking Committee chair Tim Johnson, and possibly Harry Reid as well, though he has been quiet.
Senators Barbara Boxer and Carl Levin published an op-ed today opposing new sanctions [“Now Is No Time for Sanctions”], arguing that Congressional action now would “endanger negotiations that most people and countries want to succeed” and could “bolster the efforts of Iran’s militants to kill the deal.”
With some Senate Dems coming out against Congressional action — and with the administration lobbying hard behind the scenes — it’s possible that a sanctions bill could actually go down to defeat in the Senate, which would be a rebuke to the hawks. But it’s very possible one could pass, and if the White House is right, it would put the prospects of a long term diplomatic breakthrough in doubt.
(c) The Washington Post Company
The 58 Senators Who Would Destroy Diplomacy
And Push the US into a War with Iran
US Legislative Information / Congress.gov
Sen. Kirk, Mark Steven [R-IL]*
Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY]*
Sen. Graham, Lindsey [R-SC]*
Sen. Cardin, Benjamin L. [D-MD]*
Sen. McCain, John [R-AZ]*
Sen. Casey, Robert P., Jr. [D-PA]*
Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL]*
Sen. Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE]*
Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX]*
Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT]*
Sen. Ayotte, Kelly [R-NH]*
Sen. Begich, Mark [D-AK]*
Sen. Corker, Bob [R-TN]*
Sen. Pryor, Mark L. [D-AR]*
Sen. Collins, Susan M. [R-ME]*
Sen. Landrieu, Mary L. [D-LA]*
Sen. Moran, Jerry [R-KS]*
Sen. Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY]*
Sen. Roberts, Pat [R-KS]*
Sen. Warner, Mark R. [D-VA]*
Sen. Johanns, Mike [R-NE]*
Sen. Hagan, Kay [D-NC]*
Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]*
Sen. Donnelly, Joe [D-IN]*
Sen. Blunt, Roy [R-MO]*
Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ]*
Sen. Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK]
Sen. Manchin, Joe, III [D-WV]
Sen. Coats, Daniel [R-IN]
Sen. Vitter, David [R-LA]
Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]
Sen. Isakson, Johnny [R-GA]
Sen. Boozman, John [R-AR]
Sen. Fischer, Deb [R-NE]
Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT]
Sen. Thune, John [R-SD]
Sen. Coburn, Tom [R-OK]
Sen. Chambliss, Saxby [R-GA]
Sen. Toomey, Pat [R-PA]
Sen. Wicker, Roger F. [R-MS]
Sen. Enzi, Michael B. [R-WY]
Sen. Inhofe, James M. [R-OK]
Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT]
Sen. Scott, Tim [R-SC]
Sen. Portman, Rob [R-OH]
Sen. Alexander, Lamar [R-TN]
Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]
Sen. Barrasso, John [R-WY]
Sen. Johnson, Ron [R-WI]
Sen. Hoeven, John [R-ND]
Sen. Burr, Richard [R-NC]
Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO]
Sen. Heller, Dean [R-NV]
Sen. McConnell, Mitch [R-KY]
Sen. Cochran, Thad [R-MS]
Sen. Crapo, Mike [R-ID]
Sen. Shelby, Richard C. [R-AL]
Sen. Sessions, Jeff [R-AL]
Posted in accordance with Title 17, Section 107, US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposes.