You're watching...
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) tells Alan why he thinks that Senate rules regarding the filibuster should be changed.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
-- -- -- I love the Oregon senator Jeff Burton Lee who is fighting the good fight night.
Changing the filibuster rule -- something you've been promoting and isn't -- the Harry Reid.
Flip flopped on this he changed his position on.
Well absolutely two years ago when I first read the talking filibuster and and other types of reports.
The majority leader Harry Reid was was not supportive.
We had 46 Democrats who voted in favor of a package of reforms but Harry Reid was -- -- -- you know you Republicans are saying well now the Democrats are in the majority in the senate all of a sudden.
They want to change the filibuster rule and they wouldn't do it and Republicans want to do it when they had the majority.
When Republicans did propose a change that was -- burgers and nuclear option.
Which wasn't fixing the filibuster it was eliminating the filibuster.
And it was doing it in the middle of -- to your cycles in order to -- basically -- through all of President -- judge them nominees.
Quite different here we're proposing improving the way the filibuster works by saying.
That its traditional.
That he's been if you're going to have argued that there should be more debate -- come before he's been the time and energy to present your case your colleagues and the American public that's the way it was done in the past and that's what should be done now.
So that's that's hardly radical concept to put forward that a -- both parties -- you could be.
Why is it whatever change him over the -- movie mister Smith goes to Washington and -- -- -- -- and you know people would read the phone book but.
Why did that ever get change.
Yeah it changed through culture.
Not through rules the culture was that we are majority body and that if you're going to.
Interfere with the majority's hoosiers and then you have the responsibility.
To make your case to your colleagues in the public so people would take the floor.
To make their case not because they're required to do so under the rules.
So.
The concern is that if a bare majority says Mitch McConnell.
Can now proceed to any bill accuses him once on that bill the majority leader all by himself -- out all amendments that aren't to his liking.
Than those who were elected.
Who elected us he says to advocate for their views the love -- -- voice of the legislative process.
Well it could be more wrong because -- essentially.
Their voice is operating didn't right now this silent filibuster means that they're not making their case for the public but this isn't a chance.
And the responsibility to make their case publicly.
So it becomes a palatable it becomes transparent.
And the public can weigh in with their their home state senators -- -- support this guy is he wrong.
This this woman.
Support this or oppose it.
Because they're a ball but right now there's there's no circle it's it's completed because the public can you see the filibuster -- it operation.
And in terms -- of whether or not -- majority leader.
Pills to treat almost McConnell is really misleading the public on this because city over the last two years here is only so between nineteen times.
The -- nineteen over the the that the four year period.
The -- has been filled.
The the filibuster is being used over 380 times during this same time period so it's it's it's it's really.
Not.
The a -- complete.
-- fairer comparison if you.
I think we and it may be us civilians and understand the term the tree has been felt.
-- absolutely complete the question is this the of these minority feels like they should be -- -- remembered I agree with them in fact majority members.
Should be all offer amendments as well.
The package that -- two years ago had a protocol.
For amendments.
We didn't need -- hadn't passed because nobody objected to the amendment -- You'd be good either side and and they were socially relevant to the ability here.
But now what is has happened is that I try to offer commitment.
Someone else objects.
Because they object to mine I object to theirs and were were paralyzed in the negotiation ensues in the -- deep freeze.
That that is.
-- to resolved but.
You essentially -- the filling the tree notion.
Is that the first two amendments that would be.
Have priorities are done by the majority leader with equal fills the amendment tree just comes from a diagram -- -- now amendments were that looked like tree branches so so the majority leader takes the first two priority positions for amendments.
And if if nobody is can get unanimous consent to set those aside their blocks from putting -- amendment -- even if it and that's that's where we can.
Which I would -- senator Jeff -- late.
You have an interesting point when you've said that in terms of rule changing a rule making you want to know how would you feel about it if you were in the minority.
And would that be acceptable.
Absolutely that's been the standard -- put forward the very beginning anyway started advocating the talking filibuster two and a half years ago.
And certainly it remains -- -- gold standard now.
These changes that we're proposing is that you have it is to us to debate if you argued there should be more debate.
And to eliminate -- the filibuster the motion to proceed.
And to be able to get to conference committee so get a bill to the war.
Then you can you can filibuster of all the war get a bill to conference committees so filibuster what comes out -- -- but don't.
Had a situation where the minority can use these relatively new tactics historically.
Folks did not objecting to him -- on the report that -- not object to getting a bill.
These things have been just an extra level.
Of paralysis he's -- -- nothing but eating -- time so that the no real substance and never get support for me.
-- -- there's a professor of political science University of Miami says any reform has to address calls for quorum.
Or for votes -- the entire majority party could be at beckon call of one filibustering senator to make any sense.
Yes absolutely the way it works right now it is that.
Well -- -- turn back the clock and imagine the senate floor with.
Maybe 26 senators.
So -- office was before they were all there all the time it really was no quorum issue.
That was true even in the nineteen hundreds.
But now I -- situation where people go to the floor for a vote but -- their only means -- offices they're not there so when.
Folks are required to to speak they don't have to speak they simply say well there's not a quorum here and -- you have a quorum call.
And people turn to C span in the EC the the clerk -- the role exhibiting would be pretty.
And so this is -- you try to go through the night right now.
You have to have.
51 Democrats to keep one Republican speaking just so you have the -- and that is an impossible in balance of power.
To have 51.
Present to keep one filibuster.
Now on the.
For you gotta wonder how anything ever got done in the first place how do we begin health care diner -- the other first.
Accomplishments of the Obama's first term.
When -- this rule is in place.
Well -- short answer is we we had almost sixty senators.
Who would vote for cloture because we had 59 Democrats in it for very brief time we had we had sixty B.
After Franklin had been appointed but you know words that are -- passed away.
And but you had Joseph Lieberman often voted with the Republicans -- -- caucus with the Republicans -- Ben Nelson Ben Nelson often voted with the Republicans.
Yeah we had we had to work hard to get those sixty votes no no question about it and if you think about it doesn't very unusual -- when either side is going to have close to sixty votes.
And these sorts of challenges.
That were brought into the legislation.
Things like -- it's important Oscar compromise and so and so -- that didn't make the legislation better to get those sixty votes it became a pretty ugly.
Sausage making yeah process that really weakened the -- Now it's really odd how the senate works -- people on the outside.
For example this has to be done in January -- is the arcane rules indicate universal a slim window within which.
A majority can affect rule change.
Well.
Let me put it this -- the tradition has been to -- -- debate at the start of the two year process that's that's basically the -- that it virtually all legislatures.
However there's nothing when the constitution says senator organize itself.
It absolutely has no reference to time so and so there can be a debate over rules at any moment or two year period.
But by tradition and therefore in terms of summoning.
The need the momentum for a rule change.
The start of the two year period is the right moment.
We'll senator with a bunch of new senators Elizabeth Warren for example Massachusetts is certainly is on the same page you perhaps.
Real change can be affected this time around.
Absolutely.
We really need the public to get engaged -- Encourage folks to go to -- the filibuster dot com to sign a petition because we need the public to weigh in that they are.
Sick and tired of the paralyzed and broken senate.
Let me be real debate real dialogue and I think the citizens weighing in through that petition -- filibuster dot com would be extremely helpful.
Senator thanks so much for your time appreciate -- very much thanks for explaining everything to us.
Thanks so much senator Jeff -- of Oregon -- --
