An Urgent Call to Action

By: American Decency Staff

Calls are urgently needed to our senators right now at 202-224-3121.

Read our article below detailing the very concerning deal President Obama is seeking to make with Iran and how our Republican-led Senate is on the verge of giving him free rein. 

But first, as Gary Bauer wrote in a Special Alert yesterday:  We urgently need to call our senators right now at 202-224-3121. Urge themto vote for pro-American, pro-Israel, anti-nuclear Iran amendments coming up for votes this week. Here's why.

The Senate is debating legislation providing for congressional review of President Obama's nuclear deal with Iran. The bill was approved by a unanimous vote in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee two weeks ago.

Now the bill must be strengthened because, as it is written, it won't stop a bad deal with Iran. And a nuclear-armed Iran will threaten Israel and the United States.

Fortunately, several conservative senators have introduced numerous amendments that would add teeth to the bill.

America deserves a serious debate over our Iran policy. We must do everything we can to prevent a nuclear Iran.”

To identify your senators, click here. 

Call the Capitol Hill switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be connected to your senator's office. (A staff member for your senator will take your call.)  Gary Bauer offers this example of what to say when you call:

"Hi, I am a concerned voter. Please tell the senator that I want him/her to vote in favor of amendments to the Iran nuclear bill to make it stronger and to stop Iran's aggression. The current bill is too weak."

And now for a more in depth look at this concern, starting with a quote from one of my historical heroes:

Our people … should know the truth. They should know that there has been gross neglect and deficiency in our defences; they should know that we have sustained a defeat without a war, the consequences of which will travel far with us along our road; they should know that we have passed an awful milestone in our history …

This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.

This quote is from Winston Churchill’s speech before the House of Commons in 1938, in protest of the Munich agreement signed by then British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain.  The Munich Agreement was an attempt of appeasement with Nazi Germany, where European leaders threw Czechoslovakia under the bus, allowing annexation by Hitler of strategic portions of the small nation.

Churchill’s words were prophetic then for the nation of Great Britain and, oh, how they apply to America today in our appeasement with Iran.

There are key differences, though.  While Chamberlain has since been seen as a feckless leader, seeking, as he stated, “peace in our time,” there are many indications of a different agenda from our nation’s leader.    Mark Levin, who served in the Reagan administration, recently stated on his daily radio program regarding President Obama’s dealings with Iran:  “This is worse than isolationism.  This is interventionism on the wrong side.  That is, we’re supporting our enemy.  This is a sworn enemy that’s threatened to destroy America.” 

President Obama is not seeking peace for the United States.  His “negotiations” with Iran are the equivalent of giving “aid and comfort” to a country that has declared itself our enemy.  Now the Obama administration wants to give the Iranian regime a signing bonus of $50 billion if a nuclear deal is reached, along with upwards of another $100 billion in frozen assets.  

Fifty billion for Iran which – just days before the news broke of this payoff – again pledged death to America and death to Israel.  Fifty billion for a country aggressively pushing into Iraq, Yemen, and Syria.  A “bonus” for a regime that is holding American citizens hostage – including a Christian pastor and a U.S. Marine veteran – inflicting horrific torture and brutality.   Where is the negotiation for their release?

Jonathan Schanzer, a top terrorism-funding expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), said. “This could be the largest cash infusion to a state sponsor of terrorism in modern history,” and would enable Iran to continue its support of terror groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

And while President Obama is seemingly more concerned about the best interests of Iran rather than the United States, the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate is on the verge of giving him the reins.  A bill spear-headed by Republican Bob Corker and Democrat Bob Menendez has been lauded by some, claiming it would force President Obama to compromise and give the Senate the opportunity to approve a treaty with Iran.  However, the Senate already has the Constitutional authority to approve treaties!

And if this Corker-Menendez bill passes,  it actually weakens the Senate’s power for treaty approval.  As the Constitution states, two-thirds of the Senate must vote to approve treaties.  So, if a president seeks approval of a proposed treaty, he must find 67 senators to support it.  The Corker- Menendez bill would do the opposite, stating that in order to defeat a treaty, there must be 67 votes against the treaty – thereby giving the minority the power.  If this passes, a president would only need support from 34 senators to enact treaties. 

It’s highly unlikely that enough democrats would join with republican senators to reach a 67 vote majority needed under the Corker bill to vote against Obama’s treaty with Iran, thus allowing the treaty to stand.  So, if the Corker bill passes, Obama would then have his treaty with Iran and could still say the Senate “voted” for it.

As foreign policy expert Andrew McCarthy writes in the National Review:  “… the Corker bill undermines the Treaty Clause. The latter puts the onus on Obama to find 67 votes to approve his deal. The Corker bill puts the onus on opponents to find 67 votes to disapprove the deal.  The supermajority approval requirement for treaties is in the Constitution because we should not be making lasting agreements with other countries, even allies, unless there is a strong consensus that the arrangement is in the national interest. Corker’s bill turns that presumption on its head, requiring supermajority disapproval for an arrangement with an enemy regime that is plainly not in the national interest.”

McCarthy goes on to recount, as he wrote in his book Faithless Execution, during the debates at the 1787 convention, when presented with a hypothetical about a president who tried to rig the Constitution’s treaty procedure so that only friendly senators would vote on it – it being inconceivable to the framers that a president would altogether ignore the Treaty Clause – James Madison remarked: “Were the president to commit any thing so atrocious … he would be impeached and convicted.”

Read again the Churchill quote above.  What will be the consequences for our nation and the world if we capitulate to a terrorist regime?  What will be the bitter cup that we and future generations will be forced to drink?  Are we yet capable of arising to “take our stand for freedom as in the olden time?”

---

To support efforts please click here or mail your gift to American Decency Association (ADA), PO Box 202, Fremont, MI 49412.   

---