Eric Cantor Wants Congress to Define Final Iran Deal

Carolyn Kaster/AP

AA Font size + Print

The Virginia Republican says he's upset with the interim agreement, and wants Congress to shape how the administration approaches the next round of negotiations. By Tim Alberta

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is attempting to organize a bipartisan coalition to draft a bill that would narrowly define what is, and is not, acceptable in any final nuclear deal with Iran, National Journal has learned.

Cantor, the No. 2 House Republican and the highest-ranking Jewish member of Congress, informed House Republicans of his plan at Tuesday morning’s conference meeting, according to sources in the room.

I for one am really upset with that interim deal,” Cantor said, according to those who were there, adding: “We can go ahead and criticize it, but … we should be focused on what that final deal looks like.”

Cantor told his GOP colleagues that he’s working with House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, R-Calif., to find lawmakers in both parties to support legislation that would “speak volumes” about congressional expectations for an agreement.

Republican aides say Cantor’s effort represents the beginning of what they predict will be a bipartisan push to “put in writing” exactly what Congress expects in any final deal on Iran’s nuclear program. Specifically, one senior Republican aide said, Cantor’s preference is for a final deal that includes a total prohibition on enrichment.

(Read more: Why the Interim Iran Deal is for Real) 

Cantor’s office confirmed his desire to pursue Iran legislation but would not elaborate on details. “The leader does not believe the interim agreement with Iran was in our nation’s best interests, and he will work with fellow members, Republican and Democrat, to determine that any final deal definitively addresses congressional concerns,” Cantor spokesman Rory Cooper said.

The initial Iran agreement, reached late last month, softened some economic sanctions in exchange for Iran freezing parts of its nuclear program. But that deal, designed to create six months of negotiating space to reach a broader agreement, provoked a flurry of bipartisan criticism on Capitol Hill.

The House, which already passed its new round of Iran sanctions this summer, was initially thought to have little recourse in response to the Iran deal. (It’s unclear whether the Senate, under immense pressure from the White House not to approve new sanctions, will join the House in passing them.)

But negative response to the Iran deal from both parties and both chambers, Republican aides say, showed that lawmakers are eager to push back against the White House.

With another round of sanctions on hold, and Senate Democrats wary of upstaging President Obama, Cantor’s push to define any final Iran agreement could become the most realistic vehicle.

Close [ x ] More from DefenseOne

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Federal IT Applications: Assessing Government's Core Drivers

    In order to better understand the current state of external and internal-facing agency workplace applications, Government Business Council (GBC) and Riverbed undertook an in-depth research study of federal employees. Overall, survey findings indicate that federal IT applications still face a gamut of challenges with regard to quality, reliability, and performance management.

  • PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

    This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

  • GBC Issue Brief: Supply Chain Insecurity

    Federal organizations rely on state-of-the-art IT tools and systems to deliver services efficiently and effectively, and it takes a vast ecosystem of organizations, individuals, information, and resources to successfully deliver these products. This issue brief discusses the current threats to the vulnerable supply chain - and how agencies can prevent these threats to produce a more secure IT supply chain process.

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Information Operations: Retaking the High Ground

    Today's threats are fluent in rapidly evolving areas of the Internet, especially social media. Learn how military organizations can secure an advantage in this developing arena.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.