MSNBC "The Rachel Maddow Show" - Transcript

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

SEN. JEFF MERKLEY (D-OR): Thank you.

HAYES: OK. So I saw the news today that they"re talking about a vote on this sometime in later January and my first feeling was that my heart sunk because I thought, no. Should my heart have been sinking?

MERKLEY: No, no.

HAYES: Why are we doing - why is this happening?

MERKLEY: Not to worry. Right now, the Senate majority leader is planning for us to come in just for a single day this Wednesday and then come back in on the 23rd or 24th.

So the key is that we extend the organizing period and utilize that time period between the first day and when we come back in to help create the national debate over the dysfunction and brokenness of the U.S. Senate so we can come back in and have more momentum to change the rules.

HAYES: Explain to me how it"s possible that you can do that. If the rules say that it"s on the first day the Senate has to pass its rules, how is it the case that you can then not do it on the first day?

MERKLEY: The story is even more complicated. According to the Constitution, the majority can set up the Senate. They can do that any time. But according to precedent, it"s been done at the start of a two-year cycle.

Now, sometimes that first legislative day has been extended for a
week or two so the debate can continue. So if you recess or have some
other way of guarding your privilege to address the rules -

HAYES: But not adjourn?

MERKLEY: Not adjourn. Then you"re staying within essentially the principle of the organizing period for the Senate.

HAYES: I see. So now, this is actually interesting. I realize I
misunderstood something. So what you"re saying is that what is prompting
the push for this on the first day of the new Congress is precedent, is
Senate precedent -

MERKLEY: Yes.

HAYES: Rather than some sort of Constitutional mandate that it must be done on the first day.

MERKLEY: Absolutely. Absolutely.

HAYES: The Constitution only says each House shall -

MERKLEY: Yes. A Constitutional scholar will tell you they can mend the rules with 51 at any point. But by precedent, by tradition, which weighs heavily in the Senate, and by a certain common sense logic, at the start of a two-year period, you set your rules out at the beginning.

HAYES: OK. So I"m trying to - I guess I"m hedging against my hopes being dashed. So tell me that I"m - I think this - that the letter really surprised me, actually. I thought I talked to you and talked to Sen. Udall quite a bit about this issue.

I was surprised. How did that letter come about and what does that indicate? Or is that kind of - how strongly should we take that letter?

MERKLEY: Well, that letter says that there are members, a sizable number, majority of the Senate, that is very disturbed with the abuse of the filibuster and quite frankly also thinks that we need to do some other things, such as the Republicans complain about not being able to offer amendments.

When they can"t offer amendments, the Democrats can"t offer amendments either. It"s frozen out of both sides. So there is dissatisfaction about the quality of debate on both sides of the aisle. But that letter says that enough folks are concerned. They were willing to put that concern in writing and back up the majority leader.

HAYES: So is there momentum growing for this? I"ve seen - I feel like I"ve seen stuff and there is a "New York Times" editorial, right, on supporting some filibuster reform. There is an op-ed from former Sen.

Walter Mondale in the paper this weekend -

MERKLEY: Yes.

HAYES: Supporting it as well. Do you feel like this is becoming something that people are more aware of?

MERKLEY: Yes. And I think they"ll become more aware over the next few weeks, because, quite frankly, at the end of the last session, we were dealing with "Don"t Ask, Don"t Tell". We were dealing with the START treaty and then the holidays came.

It"s very hard to get people paying attention to something as important as this. The first thing that people have to know - they may say, well, you passed some important legislation. Is the Senate really broken?

Well, yes it is. We had - you talked about Mondale. Well, in "75, when he sought to change the level of the filibuster from 67 to 60 senators they had had 44 filibusters during the previous two-year periods.

We had more than three times that in the last two years, so three times the dysfunction, if you will, that drove the last major reform effort. Not a single appropriations bill completed. No budget.

A huge backlog of nominations, both for the judiciary and for executive branch which essentially means the Senate is abusing its advise-and-consent function to attack and undermine the other branches of government, certainly not consistent with our constitutional responsibilities.

That gives you some flavor. And then hundreds of House bills never, never taken up because they"ll never be able to get time on the floor.

HAYES: Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon, who is spearheading the effort to reform the filibuster, I really appreciate you coming on tonight. It"s great to be with you. Thanks a lot.

MERKLEY: Great to be here. Happy New Year.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source