OFFICIALS LEGISLATION INTEREST GROUPS PUBLIC STATEMENTS COMMITTEES VETOES

Order of Procedure

Date: Jan. 31, 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Issues: Legislative Branch


ORDER OF PROCEDURE -- (Senate - January 31, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, first let me commend the Senator from Virginia for his leadership and the contribution he has made to this historic debate, both for the Senate and for our Nation. Thank you because I think what you have presented in good faith is an effort to engage in a very important and historic debate. I thank you for that. The fact that you have drawn so much support from both sides of the aisle is a testament to the fine work you have done, and I am glad that you are here this evening in an effort to continue that work.

I would say to the minority leader, the Senator from Kentucky, it is understandable that having been given this language and this information at this late hour that he wants a little more time to reflect on it, and I hope in the morning that we can come to the agreement that we all want. But to reiterate what the Senator from Nevada, the majority leader, has said, what we are seeking to do is what the minority leader has expressed, and that is to create the appropriate forum and the appropriate vehicle for the debate on this issue.

We struggle because the procedures in the Senate make it difficult to take resolutions and amendments. It is clumsy, it is awkward, it is difficult to do. So what the majority leader has suggested is to treat this resolution as a bill for the purpose of amendment but then to remove that bill status so that there is no question as to whether it is going to the President. That gives us a chance to work our will, as the Senator from Virginia has said, using the bill-like approach to amendment and gives the majority and minority leaders a chance to work together to find a reasonable number of reasonable amendments so that we can, in fact, express our will on this critically important issue.

But I say to the minority leader from Kentucky, there is no guile in this proposal. It is an effort to find a reasonable way for both sides of the aisle to address this historic debate.

http://thomas.loc.gov/

arrow_upward