Sen. Chuck Schumer (NY-D) announced his opposition to the historic Iran deal on Thursday, according to the lawmaker’s Medium post.
“Advocates on both sides have strong cases for their point of view that cannot simply be dismissed. This has made evaluating the agreement a difficult and deliberate endeavor, and after deep study, careful thought and considerable soul-searching, I have decided I must oppose the agreement and will vote yes on a motion of disapproval,” Schumer wrote.
The Huffington Post first reported the senator’s opposition right before the primetime Republican presidential debate began.
The Senate’s third-ranking Democrat said Iran cannot be trusted because the country is not a moderate ally—far from it.
“To me, the very real risk that Iran will not moderate and will, instead, use the agreement to pursue its nefarious goals is too great,” he wrote.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-D) announced her support Thursday.
This post has been updated.
Vile and reprehensible, Chuck.
Bad choice, Chuck.
If so, then all I can say is you are pretty shameless, Senator.
Democratic fence-sitters coming out in favor means that even if they get to 60 votes in the Senate they won’t be able to override Obama’s veto. That drastically lowers Schumer’s political cost. No way he comes out against if he’s the vote that sinks the deal.
I’m no fan of Chuck Schumer or having him as a Senate leader, but I’ve read that this could be interpreted that there are not enough votes to override a veto if it came to that or it might even be passed on the vote. Per an article at Mother Jones it appears there aren’t that many Democrats opposing it.