ZAC SCHULTZ:

WE GO FROM IOWA TO WASHINGTON NOW TO TAKE UP THE TOPIC OF AN IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL. THE AGREEMENT ENDS ECONOMIC SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN IN EXCHANGE FOR A SLOW-DOWN IN THAT COUNTRY’S NUCLEAR PROGRAM. AMONG THE ELEMENTS OF THE DEAL, IRAN AGREES TO REDUCE ITS CURRENT STOCKPILE OF LOW-ENRICHED URANIUM BY 98 PERCENT. ADDITIONALLY, IRAN MUST LIMIT NUCLEAR ENRICHMENT CAPACITY, AS WELL AS NEW RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR 15 YEARS. SOME INSPECTIONS AND TRANSPARENCY MEASURES WILL REMAIN IN PLACE FOR AS LONG AS 25 YEARS. IN A FEW MINUTES WE’LL SPEAK WITH GREEN BAY REPUBLICAN U.S. REPRESENTATIVE REID RIBBLE, BUT FIRST WE WELCOME DEMOCRATIC U.S. REPRESENTATIVE MARK POCAN OF THE MADISON AREA. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE DEAL OVERALL?

MARK POCAN:

WE’VE HAD IT FOR A FEW DAYS. I’M NOT GOING TO TRY TO PRETEND TO BE AN EXPERT BUT WHAT I’M LOOKING AT IS THE DEAL WE HAVE VERSUS WHAT WE HAD GOING ON FOR QUITE A WHILE. WE’VE HAD SANCTIONS FOR QUITE A WHILE AND THEY’VE BEEN ABLE TO CONTINUE TO BUILD THEIR NUCLEAR CAPACITY, THEIR ENRICHMENT CAPACITY, TO THE POINT THAT THEY COULD HAVE A WEAPON. AND IT HASN’T WORKED. AND THE FACT THAT THEY NOW HAVE A DEAL THAT NOT ONLY – AS YOU SAID – REDUCES 98% OF THE LOW ENRICHED URANIUM, STOPS ANYTHING ELSE ALONG ANY KIND OF PRODUCTION OF WHAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE AND ALLOWS FOR THE INSPECTIONS AND THINGS WE’VE NEVER, EVER HAD IN PLACE BEFORE, IT CERTAINLY SEEMS TO BE BETTER THAN WHAT WE’VE HAD IN PLACE IN THE PAST AND A VERY POSITIVE SIGN THAT ALLOWS US TO HAVE SOMETHING WHERE I THINK THE END GOAL FOR EVERYONE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT IRAN DOESN’T HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. AND I THINK THIS SEEMS TO – FROM A FEW DAYS REVIEW OF IT – PUT US IN THAT DIRECTION.

ZAC SCHULTZ:

THE DEAL DOES NOT INCLUDE THE ANYTIME-ANYWHERE INSPECTIONS THAT PEOPLE WERE HOPING FOR. THERE HAS TO BE SOME NOTICE FOR IRAN. AND THAT WAS THE PROBLEM IN IRAQ WITH INSPECTIONS IS THAT INSPECTORS WERE TURNED AWAY WHEN THEY TRIED TO GET IN THERE. AND TWO WEEKS LATER PEOPLE HAD NO IDEA IF IT LOOKED LIKE IT WOULD HAVE. IS THAT A CONCERN?

MARK POCAN:

NO. IF WE LOOK AT THE IRAQ EXPERIENCE, WE LEARNED A LOT. WE SCREWED THAT UP MASSIVELY BUT WHEN IT COMES TO IRAN, THE FACT THAT THEY STILL ARE A SOVEREIGN NATION AND THEY HAVE SOME THINGS THAT THEY NEED TO KEEP WITHIN THEIR NATION. GIVING 30-DAY NOTICE IS WHAT THEY’RE ASKING FOR. BUT WE’VE HAD SOME BRIEFINGS INCLUDING WITH THE VICE PRESIDENT THIS WEEK ON THIS. WITH WHAT I THINK I CAN SAY THAT DOESN’T FALL IN THE CLASSIFIED ZONE, I THINK THERE ARE PLENTY OF WAYS ALONG EVERY STEP OF THE WAY OF HOW YOU’D GO TO BUILDING A NUCLEAR BOMB, WE HAVE CAPACITY TO DO NOT ONLY CONSTANT REVIEW OF WHAT’S GOING ON VIA THE AIR AND OTHER WAYS, BUT ALSO WE HAVE — VERY REASONABLY THIS WILL GIVE US THE SECURITY WE NEED TO KNOW NOTHING IS GOING TO BE HAPPENING IN PLACE FOR – AS YOU POINTED OUT – A VERY LONG AMOUNT OF TIME. I THINK THAT’S WHAT WE’VE BEEN STRIVING FOR FOR A LONG TIME. IT LOOKS LIKE WE MIGHT FINALLY BE THERE WITH THIS AGREEMENT. THAT’S THE POSITIVE PART WE HAVE TO LOOK AT VERY CAREFULLY ABOUT.

ZAC SCHULTZ:

THE DEAL ALSO EVENTUALLY LIFTS THE INTERNATIONAL ARMS EMBARGO AND AFTER EIGHT YEARS IRAN CAN GET BALLISTIC WEAPONS. IS THAT A GOOD IDEA OR A GOOD END RESULT FOR A COUNTRY THAT’S BEEN KNOWN TO SUPPORT TERRORIST GROUPS IN THE REGION?

MARK POCAN:

AGAIN, A LOT OF THINGS THEY CAN DO ON THEIR OWN RIGHT NOW AND SANCTIONS HAVEN’T DONE A WHOLE LOT OF STOPPING. THEY CAN GO IN DIRECTIONS THAT WOULD BE QUITE ADVERSE TO WHERE WE’D LIKE TO SEE THEM. IF WE WERE TO RIGHT NOW STOP THIS DEAL, I THINK SOME OF THE OTHER COUNTRIES, INCLUDING CHINA AND RUSSIA AND THE OTHER SIX THAT ARE WITH US ON THIS COULD VERY LIKELY SAY WE’RE NOT GOING TO DO SANCTIONS ANYMORE. CLEARLY YOU’RE NOT SERIOUS ABOUT BARGAINING, SO WE’RE GOING TO GO BACK TO DOING WHAT WE WANT TO DO AND WE COULD BE IN A MUCH WORSE PLACE. THAT FACT THAT WE HAVE ALL THE NATIONS IN AGREEMENT, WE HAVE IRAN IN AGREEMENT. WE THINK WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT WILL PROVIDE FOR THE SECURITY NOT ONLY THE REGION, BUT THE WORLD, BECAUSE NO ONE WANTS IRAN TO HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON – WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT VERY SERIOUSLY. QUITE HONESTLY, I’VE BEEN DISAPPOINTED AT THE RHETORIC OUT OF SOME IN WASHINGTON – WHO BEFORE IT WAS EVEN RELEASED WERE SAYING HOW BAD IT WAS. THEY COULDN’T HAVE EVEN READ IT AND THEY’RE SAYING HOW BAD OF A DEAL IT WAS. AND THAT’S JUST NOT CREDIBLE. AND I THINK THAT QUITE HONESTLY AT SOME POINT HURTS US AS A NATION IN WHAT WE’RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH BY HAVING A NUCLEAR-FREE IRAN.

ZAC SCHULTZ:

TALKING ABOUT THE REACTION OF OTHER PEOPLE, A LOT OF THE GOP PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES INCLUDING OUR OWN SCOTT WALKER HAVE SAID HE WOULD SCRAP THE DEAL ON DAY ONE IF ELECTED. IS IT POSSIBLE FOR ANYONE TO LOOK AT THIS DEAL WITHOUT HAVING POLITICS COLOR THEIR IMPRESISON OF IT?

MARK POCAN:

WELL I THINK PRESIDENTIAL CANIDATES OBVIOUSLY ARE FULL OF RHETORIC. AND I THINK THAT’S WHAT THAT IS. QUITE FRANKLY I THINK IT’S DANGEROUS RHETORIC BECAUSE IT’S NOT WHERE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE. I THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT TO SEE US WORK TOWARD A DEAL THAT MAKES SURE THERE ARE NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN IRAN. THIS LARGELY DOES THAT AND IS VERY SUBSTANTIAL, MUCH BETTER THAN ANYTHING WE’VE HAD IN THE PAST. AND LOOK AT IT FOR THAT VALUE. BUT TO JUST PUT IT OUT, YOU KNOW, POINT-BLANK I’M GOING TO GET RID OF IT DAY ONE, OR TO AGRUE ABOUT IT BEFORE YOU’VE EVEN READ IT, THAT’S JUST DANGEROUS RHETORIC. AND I THINK QUITE HONESTLY GOVERNOR WALKER HAS BEEN ENGAGING IN THAT AND I THINK SO HAVE SOME OF THE OTHER CANDIDATES. AND THAT REALLY DOESN’T SERVE US WELL.

ZAC SCHULTZ:

HOW SHOULD WE JUDGE THIS DEAL OVER THE NEXT DECADE OR TWO? IS IT SIMPLY WHETHER THEY DEVELOP A BOMB?

MARK POCAN:

I THINK WE JUDGE IT BY HOW MUCH MORE ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET IN THERE AND DO THE REVIEW THAT WE NEED TO DO TO SEE IF ANYTHING IS GOING ON? HOW TIGHT ARE THE PULL-BACK? IF SOMETHING HAPPENS, CAN WE PULL IT BACK QUICKLY? YES, THAT SEEMS TO BE IN THERE. CAN WE MAKE SURE THAT THEY’RE NOT ANYTHING TOWARDS CAPACITY? THE FACT THAT THEY’RE REDUCING 98% OF THE UPFRONT ABILITY TO DO SOMETHING AND THEN ALL THE OTHER STEPS ALONG THE WAY IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT. DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE THINK THAT THEY’RE TELLING THE TRUTH? AND FROM EVERYTHING I’VE BEEN TOLD, WE DO HAVE THAT ABILITY. THOSE ARE THE SORT OF THINGS WE HAVE TO LOOK AT. IF THAT IN THE END SAYS THAT IT’S NOT LIKELY THEY’LL HAVE A WEAPON EVEN THOUGH THEY’VE GOT THAT YEAR PERIOD WHERE THEY COULD IF THEY DECIDE TO PULL OUT OF IT, WE HAVE ENOUGH SECURITY I THINK WE’RE IN A GOOD PLACE ON IT. CERTAINLY AGAIN, I LOOK BACK FOR DECADES. WE’VE BEEN DOING SANCTIONS. AND THEY’VE CONTINUED TO BUILD CAPACITY. IT HAS NOT WORKED. SO THIS IS GOING MUCH FARTHER THAN WE EVER HAVE BEFORE AND I THINK WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT VERY SERIOUSLY.

ZAC SCHULTZ:

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.

MARK POCAN:

ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU.