On the recordJune 12, 2013
My friend from Utah asks a terrific question. It is a question of procedural rules--whether in a courtroom or in the Senate-- designed to protect substantive rights. Ultimately, the 60-vote threshold is designed to protect the substantive rights not of the Senators--we are not here in our own stead. We are instead representing the constituents who sent us here. What the majority is asking us to do by asking for unanimous consent to allow this to go to conference and to set it up for them to raise the debt ceiling with 50 votes--the majority is asking for the 46 Republicans on this side of the aisle to give away our right to speak. They are asking us to say we will cede to the majority the ability to do whatever it wishes on the debt ceiling. In giving away our right to speak, what we are giving away is not anything that belongs to us, it is the right of 26 million Texans to have their voice heard. For us to agree with the majority and say, yes, we will hand over the ability to make this decision on the debt ceiling without ever again consulting this side of the aisle would be very much like the situation the Senator from Utah asked about. I don't know how the Senator from Utah would answer a constituent in Utah who said: Senator Lee, why did you give away my voice? Why did you simply hand to the Democrats the ability to decide how much debt the United States should have, to raise it? And why did you essentially give away my seat at the table?…
Source
govinfo.gov




