[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 164 (Tuesday, September 22, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Page S5733]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                               FILIBUSTER

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, those on the other side of the aisle 
who openly say they will end the filibuster if they get the majority 
should have to explain why they continue to vote to filibuster 
important issues like police reform and COVID relief. Do they somehow 
believe the filibuster is wrong in principle, or do they admit that 
they think there should be two sets of rules depending on which 
political party has the majority in the Senate?
  If you think at a minimum that the filibuster should be used 
sparingly and judiciously, how do you justify voting to block even 
moving, even discussing, let's say, for instance, Senator Scott's 
police reform bill when you have been promised amendments by the 
majority leader and when you can always filibuster final passage if you 
still aren't satisfied after the bill has been discussed for a long 
period of time and a lot of amendments have been adopted? It is clear 
their position on filibuster is pure partisanship at its worst.
  If there is any way you are going to promote the bipartisanship that 
the people are demanding, it is only in this institution of the Senate, 
where it requires 60 votes to get to finality on a bill and where you 
have pressure to do things in a bipartisan way or nothing gets done.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________