Chuck Schumer

It is not the minority that is the obstructionists.

The whole idea of the Senate is not to have majority rule. It is to force consensus.

While the membership of the Senate will change, problems posed by the abuse of the filibuster are not going away.

Senator Byrd complained about lobbyists walking into senators' offices and asking them to place holds on bills.

Senators do not melt.

However, far too often in today's Senate is the decision to begin debate itself is filibustered.

I want to thank Senator Bennett, who has been a great partner in running constructive, thoughtful, non-partisan hearings.

I do think though, Senator, that the use of instruction-- obstructionist tactics by the minority and the majority's response in trying to get its program enacted has played a fundamental role...

I would guarantee them those rights.

We ought to restore it to its traditional role as the deliberative body where we have amendments and we have debate.

The filling of the tree basically cuts off the Minority rights in a most intemperate and inappropriate way

It is the Senate where the Founding Fathers established a repository of checks and balances.

The hearing will come to order. And I want to thank everybody, including my friend Bob Bennett, for participating in this hearing.

A bill was passed in the Senate by voice vote, jointly sponsored by Senator Patrick Leahy and Senator John Cornyn, to amend the financial regulatory law with regard to the Freedom of Information Act.

We will feel it next year for that reason.

Well, thank you. And thank you both. Excellent testimony.

If you do not allow the Minority to amend, in fact if you do not allow every member of the Senate to have an opportunity to amend, then you are basically undermining the whole purpose of the Senate.

I particularly want to thank our first panels, Senator Harkin and Senator Udall, who have been very active in this issue for agreeing to be witnesses here today.

It appears the current majority, however, may be somewhat slimmer than it is in 2000.

But as I argue in my testimony, that then had unintended consequences because they did not think through how that would change Senators' calculations as they are deciding whether or not to filibuster.

I do believe the Senate has the right to change its rules and I do believe the Senate has the right to say we will do it at the beginning of each term.

We appreciate that they took time to appear before us to explain their proposals.

My resolution would actually require at least 41 Senators to show up and vote to block cloture, or else the legislation could move forward.

My proposal was not curtailing the right to require tough votes.

Only one really is horrible, and it is not in the Senate at either side.