I do think that Citizens United has had a really, really unfortunate effect on this conversation.

the next President could revoke an executive agreement with Iran 'with the stroke of a pen,' and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.

The reason was because this isn't where the problem is. It is in China and India and other places.

I don't see how that is different.

All of these statements sound good in a press release, but the slightest level of scrutiny reveals a significant lack in authenticity, substance and merit.

I think the Senate needs to look hard at that and ask itself, going forward, does it really want to let the President make these kinds of commitments.

I believe without exception they dealt with diplomatic relations, things we would do out in the world.

the President is lecturing the rest of the world on the importance of credibility and transparency, he is going out of his way to write the U.S. Senate and the American people out of a final agreement.

If they are able to do something without ratification, without Congress's input, wouldn't the next Administration be in the same position to undo anything that was done?

It is a shame that the Obama administration has not made this type of effort when it comes to climate change.

My farmers and ranchers in Oklahoma understand this. They understand that the greatest problem they are facing is nothing that we normally face in the Ag Bill but it is overregulation by the EPA.

What we are doing here is exactly what we did previously by treaty.