WEEKLY STANDARD
by Fred Barnes
March 2, 2015

Who could be against submitting a nuclear deal with Iran to Congress for approval? If you guessed Barack Obama, you’re right. President Obama is not merely opposed to a role for Congress. He’s ready to veto legislation providing for an up-or-down vote on any nuclear agreement with Iran, even if the vote is nonbinding. Why? “Because it would .  .  . negatively impact our ability to reach a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear program and to implement a future deal,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest explained.  That’s not all. “A congressional vote on a non-binding instrument is not required by law and could set an unhelpful precedent for other negotiations that result in other non-binding instruments,” he said. Besides, “Congress has had its say,” since members of Congress have been kept “in the loop on the status” of the talks with Iran.  Obama protests too much. There’s something fishy about his insistence on stiffing Congress. He has no history of opposing congressional intervention in foreign affairs. On the contrary, it was Obama who pleaded for a congressional vote last year on whether to punish Syria with a bombing attack after it had used a chemical weapon to kill civilians. READ MORE