Filibuster

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it has been my good fortune to serve in the Senate for 24 years. I have great respect for this institution and continue to believe that the men and women who serve here are extraordinary examples, by and large, of public service and that we have done great things of a historic nature.

I think of the days of the Obama Presidency, when we had to rescue our economy, make reforms on Wall Street that made a difference, and build a public health system that we have aspired to for decades. We achieved those goals--not easily--with hard work and determination. I am glad to have been a part of it.

When I hear the Republican leader come to the floor and talk about his memory of the Senate, I hasten to add: There is another side to the story. I will come to the floor in a few days to outline the history of the filibuster, but I am sure the Senator from Kentucky, who has been in the Senate--and his staff--in elected capacity for decades, would concede this point: Up until the 1960s, the filibuster was rarely used in this U.S. Senate. The demand for, once, 67 votes, then 60 votes was rare.

Oh, it was remembered that, in the 1960s, civil rights legislation foundered on the floor of this U.S. Senate because of the filibuster, but it was rarely applied. That changed. It changed under the Senator from Kentucky's leadership. It became so commonplace--the filibuster was being used so frequently--that it led to Senator Reid, then the Democratic leader, making some fundamental changes in the Senate rules.

I remember that day very well, and I remember the anguish that Senator Reid felt at the time. But he felt he had no recourse because the filibuster had become commonplace, the 60-vote requirement commonplace.

I don't know exactly what the argument is from the other side at the moment, but I think any fairminded Senator would concede the Senate is capable of doing great things; it is capable of being deliberative; yet it still can be decisive.

There comes a time when we should act. And to merely let every issue get mired down into a 60-vote requirement and filibuster and nothing come out of this Chamber as a result cannot be what our Founding Fathers envisioned for the world of the U.S. Senate.

I want to address that issue at another time in more detail, with facts and figures on the use and misuse of filibuster, but at this moment I would like to raise another question, which is related.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source