Diary

THE IRAN PLAN - A “DEAL” OR A “TREATY?”… AND WHY THAT’S IMPORTANT.

Good morning America – and welcome to another wonderful, bizarre unconstitutional day in our republic.

The President, with full support of the GOP-controlled U.S. Congress, has again rewritten the U.S. Constitution, this time changing the process by which our country makes “deals” with other nations.  You won’t hear much about this in the media, because everyone will be too busy discussing the points within “the deal” and not how it was reached.

The U.S. Constitution clearly states in Article II that “[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

Get that?  The president can negotiate a treaty, but it’s not considered “passed” and agreed to by the U.S. until two-thirds or more of the Senate votes “yes.”  But… earlier in this whole “Iran deal” process, Congress got the idea that President Obama wasn’t going to play this rule, so it passed a law that flips the approval process on its head.

Under this law, the president’s deal is considered ratified UNLESS Congress says “no”… and, even if it does, the President can veto Congress and the deal goes into effect anyway.

That’s a HUGE difference.  It gives the President all the power in making treaties.  It is no longer a case of the President negotiating a treaty, submitting it to the Senate for approval, and without that approval it doesn’t go into effect.   Now the Senate has given away another of its constitutional obligations; this time it’s the power of having the last word on something the President has negotiated on behalf of our nation.

Now the President now gets to negotiate a treaty, submit it the ENTIRE Congress (not just the Senate,) and unless a majority in those bodies votes “NO,” the treaty goes into effect.

Put another way, the Constitution mandates an “oversight role” for the Senate – it requires that two-thirds of Senators say “yes” or a treaty doesn’t pass.  With the Iran nuclear deal, it’s a “default-to-yes” process — now a majority of Congress (both houses) has to say “no” to stop the treaty, or it passes by default.  Even if the Senators and Representatives screw up the courage to say no, the President gets to VETO Congress, and then it requires a supermajority of both Houses to override that veto (which is unlikely to happen.)

While some politicians and megalomaniacs may prefer this new process, it’s not what our Constitution mandates.   So once again, the President — this time with Congress’s complicity — has shown it thinks the Constitution can be amended by just passing a law or signing an Executive Order.  What arrogance.  What a danger for the rest of us.

The defense for this indefensible action is the supporters’ contention that “this isn’t really a treaty… it’s just a non-binding agreement, so the process specified in the Constitution doesn’t apply”  Really?  Decide for yourself.  Here are a few things that this “non-treaty” will do, if allowed to stand:

– Lifts U.S. economic sanctions which have been in place since the Carter administration, when our embassy and personnel were seized by a new Muslim-led Iranian government (which is still in power and just as anti-U.S.)

– Unfreezes hundreds of millions of dollars of Iran’s money, so it can use it positively for its people, by, say, sponsoring terrorists around the world (Iran being recognized by our own country as the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism.)

– Lets Iran buy tanks, missiles, grenades, rifles and all other types of conventional (non-nuclear) weapons —which it can then give them to anyone it wants to.  (Iran and its junior partners in the middle East are still vocally committed to the complete destruction of Israel.)

– Cuts back, but doesn’t end, Iran’s development of nuclear materials and nuclear weapons.

The essence of a treaty is when a nation says to another “If you do this, we will do this”… so how is this not a treaty? Also this “deal” has timetables which commit the U.S. to specific actions ten and fifteen years from now – long after President Obama leaves office.  So it’s committing our NATION, not just this administration.  And with a straight face, people still maintain this is not a binding treaty?

Oh, I forgot to mention:  the supporters of this action also say the fact that it’s “non-binding” is another reason not to call it a treaty.  It binds us, and it bind Iran —until one or both countries decide NOT to be bound anymore.  All treaties are like that.

As I said, you won’t hear much discussion about any of this in the media because the talkarazzi and chattering class will be too busy diving into the details of the “deal” and when they’re good or bad for America and the world.  It’s the old magician’s move of misdirection – keeping them looking and focused on the wrong thing.

Instead, what everyone SHOULD be discussing is how bad it is that our leaders have completely broken free from the checks and balances of our Constitution, leaving it up to a small group of political cartels to decide from day to day how America — and Americans — should be governed.