Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Deal or not, many U.S. states will keep sanctions grip on Iran.....

  1. #21
    A sinister place...
    OrphanSlug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta
    Last Seen
    03-28-17 @ 07:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,860

    Re: Deal or not, many U.S. states will keep sanctions grip on Iran.....

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Okay, but why would Democratic led and controlled states being saying the same thing?
    Perhaps similar reasoning, Obama did not exactly have overwhelming success getting Congressional Democrats to like this framework for a deal with Iran either. I am having a hard time looking at how this is all playing out in other means, just seems like too many are against the idea. What surprises me though is Republicans looking to restrict businesses because of Obama's goals. Democrats surprise me on this matter for other reasons.
    "Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people." - Penn Jillette.

  2. #22
    Professor

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    02-09-17 @ 11:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    1,552

    Re: Deal or not, many U.S. states will keep sanctions grip on Iran.....

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    This is more than just political exhibitionism.....it has Bi-partisan support.



    Among around a dozen states contacted directly by Reuters, legislators in Georgia, Florida, and Michigan said they had no intention of changing their Iran policies even in light of a federal deal. State officials in Connecticut and Illinois said new local legislation would be needed to change their divestment policies, even if a deal were signed. Officials in New York and Oregon told Reuters they would look to changes in law at the federal level in the case of a nuclear deal to determine how it would affect their policies.

    Officials at Iran's mission to the United Nations did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Reuters on the state policies. White House spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan did not respond directly to a Reuters query about states' sanctions policies, but stressed that only sanctions related to Iran's nuclear program would be affected by a deal.

    The first divestment campaigns gathered steam in 2008 and 2009, and received a federal stamp of approval in 2010 with passage of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act, which encouraged states to pass such measures.....snip~

    Deal or not, many U.S. states will keep sanctions grip on Iran | Reuters
    why would bi-partisan support indicate it's more than political exhibitionism? both democrats and republicans like to get their names in the paper (not that what you've quoted here really indicates anything out of the ordinary for most of the states listed).

  3. #23
    A sinister place...
    OrphanSlug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta
    Last Seen
    03-28-17 @ 07:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,860

    Re: Deal or not, many U.S. states will keep sanctions grip on Iran.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron River View Post
    This story looks manufactured by Reuters to help 0bam look put upon by state Republicans.
    Perhaps, but we have some awkward political goings on here. From both Republicans and Democrats.

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron River View Post
    This has little to do with economics and more to do with reason and logic.
    If you find logic and reasoning with our foriegn policy these days, be sure to point that out to the rest of us. Please!

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron River View Post
    From what I read this story is about nothing. The states were asked about what they would do and a few state politicians said "X"
    I would not be so dismissive, especially in light of how much other activity is going on because of Obama wanting to deal with Iran.

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron River View Post
    But you have no problem with 0bama banning any of his team from say islamic terrorism or mentioning islam in anything but the most favorable light??
    Why would you make that conclusion? I offered nothing to suggest being supportive of Obama trying to desensitize language concerning Islamic extremism and terrorism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron River View Post
    What actions have these states taken? Have they passed any new laws in this regard??

    The dems have gotten crazier and crazier for sure and there are some crazy RINOs out there too.
    That is the point, we are talking about activity that equates to going off the deep end. Unsure we are talking in after the fact terms here.
    "Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people." - Penn Jillette.

  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 08:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Deal or not, many U.S. states will keep sanctions grip on Iran.....

    Quote Originally Posted by OrphanSlug View Post
    Perhaps similar reasoning, Obama did not exactly have overwhelming success getting Congressional Democrats to like this framework for a deal with Iran either. I am having a hard time looking at how this is all playing out in other means, just seems like too many are against the idea. What surprises me though is Republicans looking to restrict businesses because of Obama's goals. Democrats surprise me on this matter for other reasons.

    Well once I saw Illinois, California, Oregon, New York, and Michigan.....I was wondering what they thought they were doing. I could see there are Demos against the Deal. But not states and governors that supported BO no matter what.

    The Repubs I was looking at the money they would spend running into court to fight any of it.

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 08:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Deal or not, many U.S. states will keep sanctions grip on Iran.....

    Quote Originally Posted by bg85 View Post
    why would bi-partisan support indicate it's more than political exhibitionism? both democrats and republicans like to get their names in the paper (not that what you've quoted here really indicates anything out of the ordinary for most of the states listed).
    Due to the Governors that supported and backed BO.....caused me to question.

  6. #26
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    38,706

    Re: Deal or not, many U.S. states will keep sanctions grip on Iran.....

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    That's actually very interesting. And those states are all across the political spectrum.

    Is there a precedence for states doing this sort of thing?
    Not that I know of, at least in the arena of foreign policy. There are the states that have decided to legalize pot, and a couple that took it upon themselves to enforce the law against illegal immigration. Interestingly, the feds haven't said anything about the first, the came down hard on the latter.
    Its an unbelievably complex subject. Nobody knew health care could be so complicated. Donald Trump



  7. #27
    Tavern Bartender
    Kinky tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    37,312

    Re: Deal or not, many U.S. states will keep sanctions grip on Iran.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Not that I know of, at least in the arena of foreign policy. There are the states that have decided to legalize pot, and a couple that took it upon themselves to enforce the law against illegal immigration. Interestingly, the feds haven't said anything about the first, the came down hard on the latter.
    Pot should be legal in every state, but I don't want to derail the thread.

    I can't remember a state bucking the federal government over sanctions on another country. Has it ever happened?
    Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields

  8. #28
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    38,706

    Re: Deal or not, many U.S. states will keep sanctions grip on Iran.....

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    Pot should be legal in every state, but I don't want to derail the thread.

    I can't remember a state bucking the federal government over sanctions on another country. Has it ever happened?
    Not that I know of. The attempt of some states to stop illegal immigration is about as close as they've come.
    Its an unbelievably complex subject. Nobody knew health care could be so complicated. Donald Trump



  9. #29
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    02-01-17 @ 09:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,667

    Re: Deal or not, many U.S. states will keep sanctions grip on Iran.....

    It should be noted that under the U.S. Constitution, states cannot enact foreign policy on their own. Hence, they would be bound to lift the sanctions if the U.S. Government lifts sanctions, unless the Congress and President adopt legislation approving a state's policy. So, for example, if a company engages in business with Iran following a lifting of sanctions, the state or states in which that firm operates would not be able to infringe upon that business with tariff or non-tariff barriers or other restrictions. A state or local government could, however, choose to restrict its own investments from benefiting a foreign country's economic sector e.g., adopt legislation to direct its pension fund not to invest in Iranian companies or those doing business with Iran.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •