FISA

Floor Speech

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I express my gratitude to Senator Alexander, my colleague from Tennessee, for his comments and for his leadership. We decided it would be helpful to come to the floor and talk a little bit about the retreat that Senator Alexander laid out and our reasons for believing that it is important that we not take the year off just because it is a Presidential election. I think Senator McConnell most recently pointed out that we have had elections in this country every 2 years since 1788. So if we are going to use that as an excuse for not getting things done, we will never get anything done. We have a lot of important issues we need to address, and we will.

The month or so that we were in recess, from the Wednesday before Christmas until we came back the day after Martin Luther King's national holiday, I enjoyed being at home in Texas. As always, I traveled around the State and talked to a lot of people. But I also listened. What I heard from my constituents is the same thing I bet virtually every single Senator heard, and that is that people are sick and tired of the bickering and partisanship. They are sick and tired of seeing Congress not solving problems that only Congress can solve. Frankly, they are beginning to feel more and more like Congress is irrelevant to their daily lives. I think that is what accounts for the historically low approval rating we have seen of the Congress in the last year.

The problem is--and the occupant of the chair knows as well as I do--that I don't think the public differentiates between Republicans and Democrats when they give Congress a low approval rating, by and large. I think it is up to us, working together, to try to elevate that low approval rating by doing what our constituents expect us to do, and that is to work together when we can, without sacrificing our basic principles.

Let me say a word about that. Lest anybody confuse what Senator Alexander and I are saying, that we are somehow taking leave of our principles, that is absolutely not true. In Washington, I usually tell folks that we have Democrats in Texas and we have Republicans in Texas. They are all pretty much conservative by national standards, Washington standards. But the fact is, my constituents expect for me to get something done. But that is not done by sacrificing principles. I do think we have important differences, and I think those should be debated, and then we should vote. We should be held accountable in the next election for our votes and for what we have done or not done.

I think there is an important difference between standing on your principles and then looking for common ground to try to come together and solve problems. I agree with what the Senator from Tennessee said. We all know it is a fact of life in the Senate that you cannot get anything done without bipartisan support. Our 60-vote rule for cloture to close off debate in order to have an up-or-down vote requires it. So why not recognize that, sure, we can say no, no, no, but occasionally I think we ought to look for an opportunity to say yes where it doesn't sacrifice our principles, but it does find common ground to try to get things done on behalf of the American people.

I have constituents who asked me, as recently as last night: Don't you find life in the Senate and in Washington and in the Congress frustrating? Many say I could never do what you do because I would be so frustrated by it. I think there is plenty of opportunity for frustration, if we dwell on that. But I prefer to look at the opportunities for making life better for the American people and for offering solutions on the difficult issues that confront us. To me, that is what I get up and come to work for. That is why I enjoy being in the Senate. I believe it gives me a chance, as one American, to do what I can to try to make life better and to make a difference. It is not about sacrificing principles. It is doing what we said in the preamble to the Constitution when we said:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity. .....

We said that in 1787, in a document that was ratified by all of the States by 1790. That should be our goal still today--to be true to that statement of principle about what our goals are as a nation.

The Senator from Tennessee did go through a number of concrete proposals and talked about what our alternative will be to the proposals being made on the other side of the aisle. Again, I agree with him, that the American people don't expect us to come here and split the difference on everything in order to come up with an agreement if they believe that outcome is devoid of principle or sacrifices fundamental values. There are differences between the parties. Those differences ought to be reflected in a dignified and civilized and respectful debate that highlights those differences, and then we have a vote on those different points of view. We will either pass legislation or not based on that vote. But I think it will be acting in the greatest tradition of the Senate, and in a way that our constituents back home earnestly wish we would act and, unfortunately, in a way that we have not always acted.

I have to believe all Members of this body want to see our economy as strong as it can possibly be going forward. They want to see that our Nation is secure and our defense remains the best in the world; that all Americans have access to quality health care; that taxpayers not be compelled to foot the bill for wasteful Washington spending. I have to believe that all of our constituents, and indeed all Members of the Senate, believe that we need a sustainable energy policy that allows us to turn away from our over-reliance on imported oil and gas from dangerous parts of the world.

I think, as Senator Alexander pointed out, principled differences on important legislation need to be debated in the Senate and voted on and resolved rather than be left without a solution and unaddressed.

We do have an opportunity, I believe, this new year as we have come back not just to say no, no, no, to every idea that is offered on the floor but to say: Here are our alternative solutions to the problems that confront America.

Mr. President, you will be hearing us on the floor of the Senate on a weekly basis not only addressing legislation offered by the majority--and, of course, it is the majority leader's prerogative to set the agenda to call up bills; we will not be able to do that as Members of the minority--but what you will hear from us is a principled proposal to solve the problems that confront America on each of the big issues this Nation wants us to address and wants us to expend our very best efforts to try to solve.

I am delighted we have seen a sort of renewed enthusiasm for finding solutions in a principled way. I agree with the Senator from Tennessee, the retreat we had I thought was one of the most hopeful retreats I have ever participated in as a Member of the Senate because I think what we saw is a recommitment to try to solve problems, to avoid the partisan bickering and the divisiveness that has resulted in the historically lower approval rating of Congress and which turns off so many of our constituents.

Of course, as we all know, as elected officials, if we do not respond to our employer and try to address the concerns our employer has--and our employers are our constituents--then our employers may look for somebody else to do the job in the next election.

It is up to us to be responsive to those concerns, and I think without sacrificing principles, by staying true to those values we brought with us but looking for common ground. That is the art in our job, and it is more art than science. I have said it before and I will say it again, I think compromise for compromise's sake is overrated because if all compromise means is sacrificing your principles in order to get a problem behind you, I don't think you have done your job. Doing your job means standing on your principles but looking for common ground, consistent with those principles, to solve problems. There is plenty of common ground to find if we will work a little bit harder and a little bit more in earnest to try to find it.

I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Source