I want to make sure those who are following this debate understand what we are talking about. When we use terms such as ``fill the tree,'' which we are talking about, we are basically talking about a gag rule here which says Members of the Senate can't offer amendments. Some critics say: We know what you mean; the old Senate filibuster. You want to go on forever offering amendment after amendment after amendment so you can never get anything done around here. Can the leader on the Democratic side tell us, have we offered to the Republican side to limit the debate on the amendments, to limit the number of amendments, to require they be published in the Record so we know the parameters of the debate and so we know it will come to an end at a certain time, we know there will be an up-or-down vote?
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of limiting amendments in Senate debate.
Share
More from Dick Durbin
It was the largest class action settlement against the federal government in the history of our nation.
The lawmakers also emphasized that the Trump Administration’s definition of medical frailty far exceeds what is outlined in the law itself and creates additional onerous barriers for both patients and states.
Congress has neither authorized nor appropriated funding for the 'East Wing Modernization Project,' nor has Congress been provided any planning details or justifications that would allow for informed consideration of the White House’s…
The American Red Cross declared a national blood supply crisis in the U.S. last month for just the second time ever, which has impacted patients’ ability to be treated for illnesses or undergo surgery.





