[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 4743-4744]
[From the U.S. 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

[[Page 4744]]

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.

                          ____________________