The Corker bill won't block Obama's Iran deal

Instead of being considered as a treaty, which would require Obama to persuade 67 senators to approve it, the Iran deal would be considered as regular legislation. That means Democrats could stop the Senate from voting on it at all: the 54 seats Republicans control are enough for a majority but six shy of the 60 necessary to invoke cloture and force a vote. Moreover, even if Democrats deign to allow a vote, Obama will simply veto any “resolution of disapproval” Republicans manage to pass.

Republicans would need 13 Democrats in the Senate and 43 in the House to defect from Obama in order to override the veto. That will never happen. On that score, I cannot help but note an irony.

In Faithless Execution, I point out that impeachment is one of the few ways Congress can rein in an imperious president, but I contend that moving to impeach President Obama would be counterproductive unless the public was first convinced that his removal from office was warranted. Many Republicans nonetheless chastised me for broaching the subject of impeachment at all. With congressional Democrats controlled by the hard Left, they reasoned, it would never be possible to drum up 67 Senate votes for Obama’s removal even if the public mood suddenly demanded it.

Yet now, leading Republicans are rallying to support the Corker bill, even though it cannot succeed in blocking the Iran deal unless Republicans not only find 67 Senate votes but also 290 House votes.