Chuck Schumer: “I thank the Senator. I will address a question to my friend from Nevada. I have two questions. I will ask them both. The…”

“I thank the Senator. I will address a question to my friend from Nevada. I have two questions. I will ask them both. The first is this: Our good friend from Kentucky did speak of compromise, and we do want compromise. But you cannot call something a compromise and then say I want to win everything. To say that there would be no filibusters of any judges, to say that every judge could be discharged from a committee--you can call that a compromise; you can say the sky is green--it is not a compromise. That is totally the position of the other side. A compromise involves a little pain on each side to be a genuine compromise. So my first question to my good friend and leader, whom I am proud to serve under, is: Would this side saying we will not filibuster any judge be any kind of compromise at all? The second question to my colleague--I will ask both at once--is this: My friend from Kentucky said: Well, we want an up-or-down vote. Majority rules. Are there not many instances where the Senate does not operate by majority rule, where 60 votes are called for, where 67 votes are called for? In fact, I argue it can be said that 51 Senators, representing only 21 percent of the population of this United States, can pass a law.…”