I do believe that we have reached a point now where the American people are losing faith in this institution.

Do not you believe that there should come an obligation with those who initiate the filibuster to at least be present?

It provides for debate and deliberation.

The idea that Senator Byrd, the late, great Senator Byrd, when he was extraordinarily ill, had to be forced to come to the floor to provide a 60th vote, or that the Senate was frozen in the period after his death and before Senator Goodwin…

I guess when I moved from the House to the Senate I was looking forward to Senate debate.

I do not believe that we should move the threshold down, although I do think that moving to three-fifths of those present and voting would deal with one of the issues and problems that Senator Gregg mentioned.

We are losing a lot of good people, and at the same time, we are finding agencies, critical agencies, that are left headless.

if you do not like fighting fires, then do not become a fireman; and if you do not like casting tough votes, then do not run for the U.S. Senate.

I think we need fundamental change.

I could not disagree more. Why should the minority, any minority, compromise?

I would like to follow up on that, because we had a classic example where a member from your side forced a vote on a Saturday on a filibuster.

When I first came here, it was, okay, we are going to write this bill in conference.

Once you have been around for a few years and you have cast thousands of votes, you figure there is plenty for them to work with and I do not have to worry about tomorrow's vote.

So today I would argue that the Senate is not only not functional, it is not very interesting.

the filibuster is an indispensable tool for controlling the effects of partisanship and factionalism...

Complaints are everywhere heard that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties...

I hope with some of these, which I think are common sense things, do not detract from the Minority's ability.

he wonders what sort of rules changes he would want if he were in the minority

It strikes me that this really is offensive, that someone says, I have got to protect my rights, but in absentia, I have got things to do back home.

It promotes majority rules.

There is something fundamentally wrong with this institution.

It is not going to get better. It is going to get worse because every time they do a filibuster on us, we are going to do two on them.

I remember Senator Dole saying to me, 'I am supposed to be the leader around here,' and this was when we were in the minority, and, he said, 'I have got 42 independent contractors I have to deal with,' every one of which has the right to…

I predicted at that time that an arms race was underway.

It makes the Senate not an institution to be respected for its principles, but a dysfunctional institution which apparently is not even committed to principle.