Amending Senate Rules

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. McCASKILL. Madam President, when I arrived in this Chamber 4 years ago at this time, I had no idea what the ways of the Senate were. I had an idea that this was a place where people came to debate and to have a collegial relationship with fellow Senators across the aisle. There had been a lot of problems with ethical issues in the Capitol. So one of the first things that happened to the class of 2006 was S. 1, and S. 1 was a far-reaching ethics bill that included things such as no more free flights on corporate jets. It included new requirements in terms of gifts from lobbyists, and it also included a provision that I did not know at the time had been worked on by Senator Wyden and Senator Grassley for many years.

That provision said we were not going to have secret holds anymore. So imagine how great I felt on January 18, 2007, that we had done this comprehensive ethics bill that was going to clean up our act, and that we were not going to have secret holds. Well, I find it ironic that Senator Alexander says: Well, just use the rules. Just use them.

Well, so when I started figuring out that the game around here in the last 18 months had developed into a game of secret holds, I asked my staff: Hey, did we not have something in S. 1 about secret holds? Not knowing really the relationship that language had to Senator Wyden and Senator Grassley.

So my staff pulled out the legislation and we looked at it. I said: Well, right here it says they cannot do it. So I began coming down to the floor and using the law.

I did exactly what Senator Alexander recommended. I came down here and began making motion after motion, which under the language of that statute would seem to indicate all of the Senators supported--except for a handful--that once you made these motions people would have to come out of the shadows and claim their holds.

Well, that is when I discovered the people who voted for this, or a bunch of them, did not mean it. They did not mean it. It was window dressing. They were not sincere about ending secret holds because we discovered, when we started trying to use that language, some of the folks who voted for it were doing the old switcheroo. When they were called upon under the law to reveal their holds, they would just hand their hold off to someone else.

That is when I began getting frustrated with the games that were being played. I thank Senator Wyden and Senator Grassley and others who have worked on this, but I will tell you what is the most depressing thing I have heard today: that this is something that has been worked on for 15 years.

Now, seriously, think about that. We have allowed people to secretly hold nominations and the people's business, and there have been Members trying to clean it up for 15 years. We wonder why we are having trouble with our approval ratings.

Nothing is more hypocritical than all of the sanctimonious stuff I am hearing down the hall about the new era, no more business as usual, no more. We are going to have accountability and transparency. But yet we seem to be embroiled, down at this end of the hall, with not even being able to get beyond a secret hold. This should not be hard; this should be easy.

Now, some of the other provisions that are being debated today, I understand there is concern about the power of the minority in the Senate. I think those concerns have been addressed in the resolution that has been presented by Senator Merkley and Senator Udall and Senator Harkin from Iowa.

But if we cannot get 67 votes to end secret holds and amend the rules, how seriously can we take anybody who claims they want accountability and transparency in government? I mean, this is the hall of fame of hypocrisy. This is not just hypocrisy, it is the hall of fame. So that is why I think we have to get busy and get the secret hold provision done.

I would like to see us get all of these reforms done. I wanted to spend a second on what Senator Alexander's suggestion was. His suggestion was to use the rules. Well, honestly, does he think the way to solve this problem is to force the majority to stay here all night, with staff, spending the taxpayers' money to force someone over and over again to say, ``I object''?

We cannot make the minority talk. So that means the majority, whether it is Democrats or Republicans, has to stay all night and call the question. They do not have to have--I mean, we could do live quorum calls, but that is what we need to do to make this place work? That is his suggestion, to force the people who are objecting and the staff and the people around here to stay here all night every night until someone breaks? That is a good idea?

I think that means someone has probably been around here too long. It does not sound like a good idea, that it is not a commonsense idea that we would be promoting on Main Street in Missouri. I think it makes more sense, if you are the minority and you want to block legislation that you own it. Just own it. Block it. That is what the Senate is about. The minority can continue to block legislation whether the Democrats are in the minority or the Republicans are in the minority. They can block all the legislation they want. They just have to own it. They have to be willing to say they are blocking this for the following reasons--because we think it is important--and let the people decide.

Same thing with holds. You want to hold something, hold it. But let the people decide whether you are being reasonable or whether you are--really what I was disgusted to learn is how many people were using secret holds. In fact, they brag about it. They are using secret holds to get something else. I am going to hold this nominee in this department because I want money for a community center in my town. If you do not give me money for a community center in my town, you cannot get the Deputy Secretary of the Interior through. I mean, I am making up this example, but this was actually going on. It is like you secretly hold something so that you can get them to give you something else. That is the essence of the backroom dealing that people are disgusted with. Own it. Be proud of it. Defend it. Debate it. But do not hide it. That is what this is all about.

I thank all of my colleagues who have worked on this. I just want to close with this comment: Bad habits have consequences, and if we do not take this opportunity to fix what is going on in the Senate--this is not the way the Senate has operated for hundreds of years. If we do not change this path, then we are going to be on this path forever. And if the minority now does not think that when the time comes they may not be in the minority anymore, if we do not think we have not learned from them--seriously?

This place is going to be dysfunctional as far as the eye can see because they will fill the tree and we will just block everything. Then they will block everything and we will fill the tree. This is going to go on forever until there are enough people around here who are willing to set aside the political maneuvering and do what is right for the future of deliberations in a body that we all want to be proud of. But right now we cannot be so proud of the way we operate.

I thank the Senator from Oregon and all of the Senators who have worked on this issue. I hope we can pull back from the brink because that is where we are. We are about ready to institutionalize a way of operating around here that is not something that any of us should be proud of.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source