Filibusters And Delays In The Senate

Floor Speech

FILIBUSTERS AND DELAYS IN THE SENATE -- (Senate - April 15, 2008)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I, too, rise in strong support of the transportation technical corrections bill. First, I commend my friend and colleague, Senator Boxer, on her hard work and leadership in putting in these corrections.

I thank Leader Reid for his determination to get this act through the body. Yet it seems our colleagues across the aisle will stop at nothing to obstruct our efforts which will improve the lives of working Americans who struggle to make ends meet and filibuster a comma, filibuster an exclamation point, filibuster the name change of a road to a way.

What is going on here? What is going on? Well, I have two points I would like to make. But first I ask my colleagues across the aisle, is there any topic that you will not filibuster? If you will filibuster a technical corrections bill, name changes, punctuation changes, corrections in terms of where the miles were supposed to be and where they are, what will you not filibuster?

Now, let's talk about two things. First, this bill is a win-win for the American people. We are entering a recession. We all know we need to prime the pump. Many of us believe we should have a large public works spending program. But the question is, Should we pay for it or should we not?

But in the SAFETEA-LU bill, this technical corrections bill, the money is already allocated. It cannot be spent because of some nonpolitical small error in the drafting. So this bill makes those corrections and hundreds of projects can sally forth and employ people with no particular cost to the Federal Government. Who could object to that? Do my colleagues want to tell the construction workers and those who have little diners and lunch places and restaurants where construction workers eat, and those who supply the construction industry: Heck with all of you, we are filibustering.

So on the merits it makes no sense to block this bill--on the merits. I have to say this to our minority leader: I know there are probably Members on his side who say: I want something else. I do not want to let this bill go through. There is a larger obligation. If we let every single Member of the other side of the aisle paralyze this body, then we are doing America a disservice.

I would plead with the minority leader to tell his individual Members: You do not have--each one of you does not have veto power over anything, particularly something as trivial as this.

So why is this happening? That is the second point I wanted to address. I will tell you why. The other side is basically paralyzed. They have no program for America. They have no agenda for America. They do not know what to say except the old nostrums that were rejected years and years and years ago. They cannot say yes and so they try to show some kind of position. They just say no. That is what is going on here. It is the internal problem on the other side of the aisle, the hard right versus the right, versus the mainstream versus the moderates. They are all in a knot, and they cannot come to an agreement on anything, even a technical corrections bill that everyone has agreed to on the substance.

So the only thing that can unify them is a two-letter word: N-o.

Well, let me say that to allow any single Member to obstruct this bill is not living up to what the Senate is all about. It is not living up to what America is all about. It is not living up to what democracy is all about. Our leader has not said you cannot amend. Our leader has not said you cannot debate. I know there are a few Members on the other side of the aisle who believe there may be changes made. Let them debate it and let's vote.

But, no, the answer is only no. It has not been only on this bill. My friend and colleague from Illinois went through a long list of bills that are even more consequential than this one. Now, this one is not inconsequential. The changes are inconsequential, but the results are consequential. Again, it will employ thousands of people and release millions of dollars that have already been paid for to do worthy projects.

That, nobody disputes. But instead we have 65 filibusters already; 57 is the record--65 and going up. The filibuster used to be used on issues of major importance. It is now being used for everything, even the changing of punctuation and spelling, misspellings. Why? Because the only thing that unifies the other side is the word ``no.''

Well, the American people, come November 2008, are going to say ``no'' to the other side.

They are going to say: No more of this obstruction. We are going to give our side the number of votes we need to move forward, because 50 votes is not enough. Sixty is the need. This temporary refuge in the word ``no'' of a false unity will only be temporary.

I yield the floor.

Source