Madam President, I thank my colleague. He has more institutional knowledge, has been here longer, and understands this process. I haven't been here as long, but I am trying to put a little common sense to it, and I am having a hard time. I…
Madam President, I thank my colleague. He has more institutional knowledge, has been here longer, and understands this process. I haven't been here as long, but I am trying to put a little common sense to it, and I am having a hard time.
I am not naive enough to stand up thinking that if I could have given my speech before we took that vote, it might have made any difference. I wish it would have. I wish I could have. But it didn't happen that way.
Words cannot express how disappointed I am--I truly am--to stand here as the only Member of the Senate who voted against the nuclear option in 2013 when it was a Democratic proposal and in 2017, the Republican proposal, and now what we did today. I have consistently voted against this because it is not who we are, and it is not about what we are about either.
For those who don't know, the nuclear option is strictly a gimmick that allows the majority party to truly steal the power of debate and the power of the filibuster from individual Senators. Why does it matter? Because so much of our influence as Senators comes from our power to filibuster. It is also the most powerful tool we have to force compromise and to stand up for the people we represent.
In spite of the importance of this power, everyone else in the body who has had the chance has voted to use the nuclear option to lower the votes required to end debate from 60 votes to a simple majority of 50 plus 1 on different types of nominees. That is a tragedy for our constituents. For this country, it is even more of a tragedy. For the institution of the Senate, it is a disaster.
This debate is not new, and I would not be honoring the legacy of the late Senator Robert C. Byrd, whose seat I sit in, if I did not take the opportunity to at least recite a little history here on the floor of the Senate.
The Founding Fathers always intended the Senate to be deliberate, and we are known as the most deliberate body in the world.
George Washington himself was said to have told Thomas Jefferson that the Senate should serve as a ``cooling saucer'' for legislation from the House. As you know, the House works on a simple majority; 218 Democrats or 218 Republicans can do anything they wish. The Senate is supposed to temper that down.
This body was created to protect the rights of individual States-- small States in particular. In the Federalist Papers, John Jay notes that ``in this spirit it may be remarked, that the equal vote allowed to each State, is at once a constitutional recognition of the portion of sovereignty remaining in the individual States, and an instrument for preserving that residuary sovereignty.''
The filibuster is essential to preserving that residual sovereignty, and diminishing that power should matter to anyone who comes from a small or rural State like my State of West Virginia. This power was also meant to empower individual Members, like me, who often find themselves in the minority of their own party.
That doesn't mean we can't make changes for efficiency. But today's rule
change and the two that came before it in 2013 and 2017 were not meant to make this place more efficient; they were meant to take power from each and every Senator. That means you and I have given up our power and our ability to represent our States.
Before 1917, there was no way to end a debate in the Senate whatsoever, from our beginning, so one Member could grind this place to a halt for however long they felt necessary. Then, at the urging of President Woodrow Wilson, the Senate adopted rule XXII that year, 1917, and first used it 2 years later to end a filibuster against the Treaty of Versailles.
For the next 80-plus years, some tweaks were made to the rule and its reach was expanded, but there was no real threat to the existence of the rule. In 2005, that all changed when then-Majority Leader Bill Frist made the first serious effort to change the rules of the Senate and reduce the power of every Member of this body by deploying the nuclear option. None other than John McCain and Robert C. Byrd, our dear departed friends, teamed up to form the Gang of 14 that cut a deal on a package of nominations that took the nuclear option off the table--but only for a little while.
In 2013, when Harry Reid and Democrats--my side of the aisle--voted to end the filibuster for Presidential nominees, I was one of only three Democrats to fight and vote against it. The other two, Mark Pryor and Carl Levin, are no longer serving in the Senate today, but we represented all wings of the Democratic Party--from the liberal end, to the conservative end, to the moderate centrist end. We stood together despite our differences because we knew that it would forever lessen the institution of the Senate and that it would come back to bite us when we weren't in the majority. That was the point we made at that time. That was the argument we made and pleaded with our colleagues.
For the past 5 years, we have seen the consequences of those actions. Today, our Republican friends are using the same excuse our Democrats used--historic obstruction. Democrats are using the same argument today that our Republican friends have used--unprecedented overreach. This is the hypocrisy that makes us understand why people think Washington sucks. It is on both sides. No one is innocent on this.
In 2013, the current majority leader, Mitch McConnell, was furious about what the Democrats were threatening to do. He called it breaking the rules to change the rules. And I agreed with him. He was right. I voted with him.
In 2013, I heard and listened to Leader McConnell when he said:
The American people decided not to give the Democrats the
House, or to restore the filibuster proof majority they had
in the Senate back in 2009, and our Democratic colleagues
don't like that one bit. They just don't like it. The
American people are getting in the way of what they'd like to
do. So they are trying to change the rules of the game to get
their way anyway.
This is precisely what the American people decided about Republicans in the 2018 election, and the Republicans have now gone down the same path Leader McConnell warned us against. You would think that at least we would understand the definition of ``insanity''--doing the same thing over and over, thinking we are going to get a different outcome. It doesn't work that way.
Leader McConnell went on to say: ``So look, I realize this sort of wishful thinking might appeal to the uninitiated newcomers in the Democratic conference who served exactly zero days in the minority, but the rest of you guys should know better.'' And he is absolutely correct. Everyone should know better. Those of you who have been in the minority before should know better because what goes around comes around.
His final warning, which I am disappointed my Republican friends didn't listen to, was this:
If you think this is in the best interest of the United
States Senate and the American people, to make advice and
consent mean effectively nothing, obviously you can break the
rules to change the rules to achieve that.
That is what we have done.
But some of us have been around here long enough to know
that the shoe is sometimes on the other foot.
While the majority leader and minority leader have flipped their positions and their perspective today, the lesson is clear: Breaking the Senate for political expedience will, over time, hurt all of us and, most importantly, our constituents and the American people.
I firmly believe the filibuster is a vital protection of minority views and exactly why the Framers of our Constitution made the Senate the cooling saucer. Lately, both parties have lit the saucer on fire and thrown it out the window. The Senate was set up by our Founding Fathers to force us to work together. Think about that. They knew that whatever we receive from the House would be hot as a firecracker. Someone had to put out the flame. Someone had to know to say: That is not who we are as a country, and it is not basically who we want to be as a country.
We are not the House of Representatives, and by golly, we are going there at a rapid pace--a rapid pace. It seems that when people come from the House, they bring that House mentality--scorched and burned earth. That is not what we were set up to be. This is a very different body. It is the most unique body in the world.
As the late great Robert C. Byrd himself said in the months before his death, ``While I welcome needed reform, we must always be mindful of our responsibilities to preserve this institution's special purpose.'' And we are better than this, he said.
I always tell people back home that I can't vote for something unless I can go home and explain it. I don't care if it is an idea that my friends on the Republican side have. It makes sense to me. My constituents understand it. I go home and vote and tell them why I voted with my Republican friends. If I vote with my Democratic friends and it makes sense, I tell them the same. If I vote against something of my Republican friends or Democrats, I explain to them. It has nothing to do with politics; it is policy. Does it make sense? Will it help the constituents of the State of West Virginia? Will it make my country stronger and better? That is really what I care about. That is the purpose of my being here.
For the life of me, I can't figure out how anyone who voted for this can explain it when they go back home, because we have given our power away. Every time you do this, you continue to erode the powers you have as a Senate by the Constitution of the United States of America and by the Founding Fathers who created this body. Now, how we can do it in such a willing way makes no sense. How do you look people in the eye and say: I gave up my individual power to represent you. How do I do that? I am not going to do it. I am not going to do it, and I haven't done it, nor will I ever do it.
You can say it was because of obstruction. Well, if there is an obstruction, there is a way around obstructions. You drive around obstructions. You have obstructions in your life every day. You learn to work around obstructions. It is basically by communicating. It is basically by sitting down and looking at the other side, the other point of view.
I have always said that I am not always right. I need help. But I am not always wrong either. I have, hopefully, some input, and I try to make that as a balance as I approach these things. And Republicans are--what they have done today is basically the same. We don't have obstructions we can't overcome if we respect each other. You can't blame everybody for everything. You can't blame somebody else for something you are unwilling to do. You can't blame somebody else if you don't have the patience to sit down and talk through your problems and try to understand better. You can't blame somebody else if you are not willing to give and take. That is what the whole process is about if you are going to be successful in life--anyone who has been successful. It is not ``my way or the highway''; it is ``our way going down the highway together.''
This move is a betrayal of the people we represent, and everyone in this body is complicit. It is a shame that we are going to go back and try to explain our positions with the votes that were made today. It is just a shame. It should never have come to this. For hundreds of years, we have managed to overcome obstructions and preserve our Founders' vision for the Senate, but for the last 6 years, Members on both sides of this aisle have decided that is no longer possible.
This abdication of our power and responsibility is nothing more than weakness in the face of partisanship. This is truly tribal. What tribe do you belong to? Do you belong to the Democratic tribe, or do you belong to the Republican tribe? I am sorry, I belong to the American tribe, and I am going to stay right in the tribe I belong to, and I am going to be loyal to the American tribe.
This abdication of our power and responsibility is truly, truly a weakness in the face of partisanship, and my colleagues need to stand up to the leaders. We have given too much power to the leadership here.
I remember the day when people used to talk about, oh, the committee chairman had so much power. They could run a bill and make sure it got on the floor and got voted on. Those days are gone. There is always a reason why something doesn't go to the floor, even if it goes through the committee process. Something comes out of the committee unanimously, and it still doesn't come to the floor. Try to explain that one.
To protect the powers of the Senators as representatives for their States and to protect the institution of the Senate, that is not that hard, and I know because I have done it. I have voted against my colleagues on my side of the aisle. I was up front, and I was honest. I said: I am sorry; I can't go home and explain that. It doesn't make sense at all, and I am not voting for it.
If they want to get my vote, they are going to have to sit down and say: What would it take to get your vote?
And I would explain to them: You have to adjust this or adjust this and make sense.
It is fair to the minority, and if we were in the majority, or vice versa, the majority should be fair to us. If you can work through that, you can make it. You can make it on this side. If not, it is going to be a miserable 6 years for every Senator who just got elected, if we don't come back to reality.
I know I keep calling it an individual right, but it really isn't. It is a trust passed down from the Senators who preceded us. They had the will and they had the determination to make this place work, and we have given up on that. This belongs to our constituents, the power we have here, and we have no power to protect them now.
The solution to obstruction isn't ruining the Senate. It is outreach. It is compromise. It is finding solutions that make a bunch of people on the far left and the far right very uncomfortable and mad sometimes. Until we are willing to do that, the hard work of this institution is going to get worse. So it is not that we are fractured, we are almost broken, and it was never intended. I have never seen anything broken that we couldn't fix. I hope we come to our senses. I hope we act as Americans. I hope we understand basically the whole thought process from our Founding Fathers, who had the great insight of having two bodies in a bicameral, not a unicameral, branch that was supposed to work to help each other and protect us from ourselves. Right now, we have become the worst enemy of ourselves. I hope we change.
Thank you.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.