[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 45 (Monday, April 8, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Page S2440]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ISSUES BEFORE THE SENATE
Mr. REID. Madam President, I would like to welcome back the Presiding
Officer and all the staff. I hope our 2-week Easter break was
refreshing to everyone.
This month, the Senate will deal with a number of important matters,
including judicial nominations and Cabinet nominations and a water
resources measure.
Gun Violence
The Senate will also consider a package of legislation designed to
safeguard Americans from gun violence.
In the wake of last year's terrible tragedy in Newtown, CT--a mass
shooting we will never forget and that claimed the lives of 20 little,
tiny boys and girls and 6 educators--I said shortly thereafter I would
bring antiviolence measures to the Senate, and we are going to do that.
It is time Congress engaged in a meaningful conversation and a
thoughtful debate on how to change the law and culture that allowed
this violence to grow so much.
I have said every idea should be debated and every issue should get a
vote. From better mental health treatment, more secure schools,
stronger background checks, banning assault weapons, the size of
magazines or clips, and other issues, these ideas should get a vote.
There are strong feelings and deep disagreements about some of these
measures, but every one of these measures deserves a vote, a yes or a
no--no hiding, no running from an issue that has captivated America.
There is no better place than in the Senate to begin a national
conversation about such critical issues, even if they are divisive
issues. We shouldn't stifle debate, run from tough issues or avoid
difficult choices. This body--the world's greatest deliberative body--
has a proud tradition of such robust and constructive debate.
I am deeply troubled a number of my Republican colleagues went so far
as to send me a letter saying: We will agree to nothing. There will be
no debate. There will be nothing. We want the Senate to do zero on
anything dealing with stricter gun measures. They don't even want to
let us vote.
This flies in the face of a Senate tradition of spirited discussion
that began in the first days of this institution. There is simply no
reason for this blatant obstruction except for the fear of considering
antiviolence proposals in full view. Yet many Senate Republicans seem
afraid to even engage in this debate--to have amendments to strengthen
the legislation or, if they want, to offer amendments to weaken what
the law is today.
In short, let's have a debate on violence in America. I repeat: Many
Senate Republicans seem afraid to even engage in this debate. Shame on
them.
The least Republicans owe the parents of these 20 little babies who
were murdered at Sandy Hook is a thoughtful debate about whether
stronger laws could have saved their little girls and boys. The least
Republicans owe them is a vote.
The least Republicans owe the families and friends of those gunned
down at a movie theater in Colorado and a Sikh temple in Wisconsin and
a shopping mall in Oregon and every day on the streets of American
cities is a meaningful conversation about how to change America's
culture of violence. The least Republicans owe America is a vote.
The legislation on the floor would keep guns out of the hands of
convicted criminals and safeguard the most vulnerable Americans--our
children.
This proposal is supported by 9 out of 10 Americans. Background
checks, 9 out of 10--90 percent of Americans--believe we should do
something, and I get a letter from a group of Republicans saying: Don't
touch it. We don't want anything to do with it.
It flies in the face of what 90 percent of Americans want. If
Republicans disagree with the measure, let them vote against it. One of
my Democratic colleagues said: Here are some of the things I want to
vote against. Good. They are free to vote against it. If they don't
like the laws that now exist in America, offer an amendment to make it
weaker or stronger, depending on how they look at it. They shouldn't
shut down debate or prevent us from voting on many thoughtful proposals
to curb violence.
On issue after issue, Republicans have called for a return to so-
called regular order. They come to the Senate floor saying let's return
to regular order. They ask for the opportunity to offer amendments.
They have called for free and open debate in the Senate. Those who have
been yelling the most for this free and open debate are the people who
sent me a letter saying: We are going to filibuster everything relating
to guns. Talk about speaking out of both sides of their mouth. This is
the poster child of that.
When they encounter an issue they are afraid to debate in full public
view, they want to thwart debate altogether. They have threatened to
filibuster this legislation which was passed out of committee under
regular order. That is what they said they wanted. They have threatened
to block debate on this measure, to which they are able to offer
amendments.
I am happy to see a few reasonable Republicans who have stated
publicly they are willing to engage in an important conversation on
this issue. They have urged their more extreme colleagues not to resort
to the same tired tactics of obstruction. But it will take more than 1
or 2 or 3 reasonable Republicans to ensure the families of 30,000
Americans killed by guns each year get the respectful debate they
deserve.
Nominations
Unfortunately, the type of Republican obstruction that could prevent
the Senate from debating and voting on antiviolence legislation is
nothing new. For the last few years, Republicans have practically
ground the work of the Senate to a halt. Republicans have filibustered
countless job creation measures. Since President Obama took office,
Republicans have systematically slow-walked or blocked scores and
scores of judicial executive branch nominations, including even--for
the first time in the history of our country--the nomination of the
Secretary of Defense who, by the way is a former Republican Senator.
Pending nominees have waited an average of 1 year for a Senate vote--
almost 1 year, about 280 days.
Republicans have openly filibustered 57 of President Obama's
nominees, but they have secretly stopped scores and scores of
nominations by secret holds and procedural hurdles. Republicans have
jammed executive branch nominees even when they have no objection to
the nominee's qualifications, just to eat up valuable floor time.
I am concerned about this dysfunction, but I am not the only one.
Virtually every American thinks this is foolish, the way things are
going. The Nation is watching the Senate to see whether we will ever
function efficiently again. They are watching.
I hope my Republican colleagues will work with Democrats going
forward to prove the Senate is not completely broken.
____________________