Two reasons: One, some of their Senators would have to vote for it because it is such a good amendment; they know some of them are yearning to vote for it so they get to vote. Secondly, if it got enough votes, they would have to filibuster it--``they'' being the other side of the aisle--because it would then be an amendment that the environmentalists who don't support it would insist that their Members on that side vote against. It is the strangest kind of filibuster you ever saw. It is a filibuster so as to never let an amendment pass so that the majority won't have to vote on it. And if it were to pass, they would have to filibuster it. So they are clean and blaming us for the filibuster.
Pete Domenici: “Two reasons: One, some of their Senators would have to vote for it because it is such a good amendment; they know some…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the potential for a filibuster against a proposed environmental amendment.
Share
More from Pete Domenici
If it is adopted, or something close to it, you will have fixed, in our opinion, a major problem with Medicare.
It would relate in some way to the process that you and I have learned and call reconciliation.
I am sure people are scratching their heads, as I am, wondering, why is the President not sitting down with top congressional leaders and saying, how do we avoid this, as opposed to, I am sad to say, the President does not seem very…
Well, I would just say that, sometimes when we are working on trying to solve this fiscal problem, the recognition that a long-term fix is what is needed puts many people in the position that they do not know how you do that and do it now.