On the recordSeptember 15, 2020
Mr. President, I want to just start by saying amen to everything the Senator has said. I listened to his words carefully, and I hear a great deal of caution in his words about actions that the Senate may take as a body that would be in response to perhaps short-term gain or immediate political gain--but a gain that could be finite. Over the course of the years that I have been in the Senate, I, too, have shared the same frustration about legislation that I cared deeply about that I believe had been blocked. Our parliamentarian rules have actually worked to delay things unnecessarily or oftentimes delayed things to the point where they never came to fruition. I have seen the frustration. I also see the benefit of being more methodical, of being that cooling saucer in the process of governance and particularly good governance. But the words that you used are very, very cautionary. It is as if you are suggesting that if we change the filibuster rules, we will, in effect, have changed the institution of the Senate going forward and have changed the institution so that it is, perhaps, just a smaller body than the House but subject to the same rules, where those who have the most votes on one side win. My question to the Senator from South Dakota is, Do you believe that a change in the filibuster rules here in the U.S. Senate would be permanently detrimental to the institution of the Senate going forward?
Source
govinfo.gov




