For John, BLUF: Is the President effectively managing the domestic side of the Iran Nuclear Deal? Nothing to see here; just move along.
Here is a not so optimistic view of the Agreement the Obama Administration is negotiating with Iran. The headline is "ObamaCare for Arms Control: The Iran nuclear deal has the same political weaknesses as the Affordable Care Act." The writer is Daniel Henninger and the source is The Wall Street Journal. Here is the link.
And here is the lede:
The Iran nuclear deal is going to be the ObamaCare of arms-control agreements—a substantive mess undermined by a failure to build adequate political support.Looking at the political side of this, the domestic political side, the writer says:
Next Tuesday is the deadline for completing the “political” terms of an agreement with Iran. “Technical” details arrive in June. From news reporting on the negotiations, it appears the agreement is turning into a virtual Rube Goldberg machine, a patchwork of fixes that its creators will claim somehow limits Iran’s nuclear breakout period to “a year.” Which is to say, it’s going to be another ObamaCare, a poorly designed mega-project others will have to clean up later.
In fact, Presidents Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan all submitted major arms-control treaties and agreements for Senate approval. They did so to give their work political credibility with the American people and indeed the world. But somehow Mr. Obama believes he has an exemption from the basics of U.S. politics. So we wake up one day to find he is substituting the judgment of the Security Council, with such famous allies as Russia and China, for consent from the U.S. Senate. Result: an arms deal as politically flaccid as ObamaCare.Yes, Mr Henninger doesn't seem to like the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, but it is a way of trying to explain the domestic political problems with the expected nuclear agreement with Iran.
Regards — Cliff