Iran sanctions sponsor backs off his own bill

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said Tuesday that he doesn’t want a vote on his Iran sanctions bill until late March.

{mosads}The measure, co-authored by Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), would immediately impose sanctions on Iran if negotiators failed to reach a nuclear agreement by their June 30 deadline.

In a letter sent to the White House, Menendez and other Democratic senators said they would allow nuclear talks with Iran to continue until at least March 24 before supporting a vote on the bill, the New Jersey Democrat announced.

“We also say in this letter that we remain deeply skeptical,” Menendez said, “Iran has breached the Joint Plan of Action at least once,” he added, referring to an interim agreement with Tehran.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he intends to co-sponsor the measure, but also signed the letter and does not support a vote before March 24.

Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) also expressed support for the bill, but said he would consider the administration’s arguments that doing so would derail talks.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, however, could still bring the bill to a vote before March 24.

The Senate Banking Committee on Thursday is still scheduled to vote on the bill, which Kirk is poised to introduce. Menendez is still cosponsoring the measure, an aide to the Democrat said.

Even if Democrats do not support the bill on Thursday, the bill may still pass the Banking panel with votes from its 12 Republicans.

“Without the pressure of tough sanctions, Iran would not have been engaged in any talks in the first place,” said the committee’s chairman, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.). “The threat of future sanctions represents Iran’s only incentive to successfully conclude an agreement here.”

The committee’s ranking member, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who opposes the bill, said Thursday’s vote should be delayed, and other Iran proposals considered.

“Instead, it looks like this sanctions bill will be hustled through our committee with no actual legislative hearings, even though members likely have questions about its provisions, and uncertainty about what congressional action might mean for negotiations,” he said.

Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who testified before the Banking Committee on Tuesday, said any sanctions bill would “sow doubt and confusion and may send a message that we’re not serious about negotiations.”

He also did not rule out asking for an extension after the June 30 deadline for talks. He said the goal was to achieve “key elements” of an agreement by the end of March.

“I can’t … absolutely rule out that we would look for additional time,” he said. “If we get to June, and we have the core elements in place…and it turns out we need a little more time to dot the I’s and cross the T’s, we may seek it,” he added.

–This report was updated at 12:25 p.m.