IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.
Editorial Standards
Latest News Today maintains rigorous editorial standards. Our team verifies information from
trusted sources and provides context to help readers understand complex stories.
Last Updated: Thursday, October 1, 2026 at 07:10 PM
Category: Id
Editor's Note
Latest News Today provides comprehensive coverage and analysis of breaking news stories.
This article is part of our ongoing coverage of wbna54224298, bringing you verified
information from trusted sources with added context and expert perspective.
Why This Matters: Understanding the full context of this story helps
readers make informed decisions and stay updated on developments that impact our community.
Support for Iran-sanctions bill fades
For those hoping to at least give the international diplomatic talks a chance to succeed, all of the news is encouraging.
It was just a few weeks ago that the bipartisan bill on new Iranian sanctions looked to be gaining momentum. Shortly before Christmas, the legislation started in the Senate with 27 original co-sponsors. Within one day, that jumped to 34. A couple of weeks later, the bill had 48 supporters. Two days later, it was 54. One day after that, it was 59.
By Jan. 9, the question wasn’t whether the bill would pass the upper chamber; the question was whether White House lobbying could prevent it from garnering a veto-proof majority.
Three weeks later, the bill’s momentum has stalled. Indeed, instead of gaining new backers, the proposal is losing old ones.
A controversial Iran sanctions bill is losing steam in the Senate, where at least three of its own Democratic cosponsors are warning that pushing the legislation now could thwart delicate international negotiations. “Now is not the time for a vote on the Iran sanctions bill,” Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) said at a Wednesday event hosted by Politico.
Note, Coons isn’t just a co-sponsor, he threw his support to the bill on literally the first day.
And he’s not the only one. As we discussed yesterday, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), another co-sponsor, backed off the legislation while talking to MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. “I did not sign it with the intention that it would ever be voted upon or used upon while we were negotiating,” the senator said, adding, “[W]e’ve got to give peace a chance here and we’ve got to support this process.”
Meanwhile, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), another original co-sponsor, told the Huffington Post late yesterday, “After speaking with the President, I am comfortable giving him the additional time requested before this bill goes to the floor.”
For those hoping to at least give the international diplomatic talks a chance to succeed, all of the news is encouraging.
As for why the legislation is collapsing, it’s clear that the White House became very engaged on this issue – President Obama issued a rare State of the Union veto threat this week – which no doubt made a difference with wavering Democrats. Also, as I mentioned last week, a Senate staffer told that the volume of calls on this increased recently, with progressive activists urging Democrats to wait.
Dave Weigel has some additional reporting on this, noting that the bill’s apparent failure came as a result of “a combination of hubris from the bill’s supporters and lobbying by its opponents.”