WASHINGTON — Democrats and Republicans backing a bill to give Congress a chance to review a nuclear deal with Iran insisted Tuesday that it be passed free of controversial add-ons that they claim could scuttle negotiations with Tehran, draw a presidential veto, or leave lawmakers with no say on a national security threat.
As written, the legislation would block President Obama from waiving congressional sanctions for at least 30 days while lawmakers weigh in on any final deal the United States and five other nations can reach with Iran. And it would stipulate that if senators disapprove the deal, Obama would lose authority to waive certain economic penalties — an event that would certainly prompt a presidential veto.
Senate minority leader Harry Reid warned Republican presidential hopefuls in the Senate not to use it as a ‘‘platform for their political ambitions.’’ He said the full Senate should pass the bill with the same bipartisanship that occurred in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which approved the measure 19-0.
The alternative to the bill is not a better bill, he said, ‘‘it is a deal without any meaningful congressional input.’’
The bill has gained tacit approval from Obama. He says he will sign it as written, but the White House warns that he will reconsider if the measure is substantially changed. Senator Bob Corker, a lead sponsor of the bill and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said Tuesday that in its current form the bill has the support of 67 senators, which is a veto-proof majority.
More than 50 amendments have been introduced so far — all by Republicans.
Democrats have threatened to withdraw their support if unrelated amendments distort the bill.
Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, a White House hopeful, wants to amend the bill to require Iran’s leaders to publicly accept Israel’s right to exist, a nearly impossible mandate. Another presidential candidate, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, hopes to put the onus on advocates to win congressional approval of a deal, and not on opponents to gather votes for rejection.
Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell said preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons should not be a partisan issue. But he said he would allow vigorous discussion and a robust amendment process as the Senate debates the bill.
‘‘Preventing the world’s lead sponsor of terrorism from gaining access to nuclear weapons should be the goal of all senators no matter what party they belong to,’’ McConnell said. “The price of a bad agreement with Iran could be catastrophic.’’
Among proposed additions to the bill are demands that Iran release any US citizens it is holding and refrain from any cooperation with nuclear-armed North Korea. Another insists that any agreement be treated as an international treaty, requiring two-thirds ratification by the Senate.
That amendment by Senator Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican, prompted a response from Condoleezza Rice, national security adviser under President George W. Bush.
‘‘The proposed Iranian nuclear agreement is classically an executive agreement and doesn’t need to be a treaty with advice and consent of the Senate,’’ she said. ‘‘But Congress should be able to opine given that congressionally mandated sanctions would have to be lifted.’’
Senator John Thune, a Republican from South Dakota, has filed an amendment that insists on international nuclear inspectors’ access to Iranian military sites. Senator John Barrasso, a Republican from Wyoming, wants to restore a section of the initial bill that would require the president to certify every 90 days that it is not engaged in supporting terrorism against America.