[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 2249-2250]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      REGULAR ORDER IN THE SENATE

  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I also rise today to speak about the recent 
progress we have made in restoring the Senate as an institution.
  After being sworn in as President pro tempore just over a month ago, 
I rose to address the state of the Senate and how we, as Members, must 
work together to restore its greatness. This is an opportune moment to 
take stock and to reflect briefly on our progress toward achieving this 
goal.
  I am pleased to report that we have embarked on a new chapter of 
thoughtful, productive legislating in this Chamber, just as the Framers 
intended us to and just as the American people expect us to.
  We have had hours upon hours of open, constructive debate with 
arguments from both sides of the aisle. We have considered dozens of 
amendments reflecting a full range of political viewpoints. The 
majority leader promised this body that he would restore regular order, 
and that is precisely what he has done. Not only have we engaged in 
fulsome debate and considered dozens of amendments, but we have also 
already passed four major bipartisan bills in a single month to reform 
and extend the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program, to approve the 
Keystone XL Pipeline, to address the critically important issue of 
veteran suicides, and--my bill yesterday--to provide effective 
restitution for victims of child pornography.
  That is what voters elected us to do--to craft good legislation, to 
debate it, to improve it through the open amendment process, and then 
send it to the President's desk.
  In my remarks when I was sworn in as President pro tempore, I noted 
that in recent years the foundations of the Senate's unique character--
meaningful debate and an open amendment process--have come under 
sustained assault by those who have prioritized scoring political 
points over preserving the Senate's essential role in our system of 
government.
  What a difference such a short time can make. What a breath of fresh 
air these last 6 weeks have been for this body on both sides of the 
aisle. We are moving forward. We are keeping our promises, and we are 
helping to restore the Senate as the world's greatest deliberative 
body.
  I wish to highlight some specifics of these positive changes we have 
witnessed over the past work period.
  First, robust debate. The late Senator Robert C. Byrd liked to say 
that ``as long as the Senate retains the power to amend and the power 
of unlimited debate, the liberties of the people will remain secure.'' 
In this new Congress, we are restoring the right to meaningful debate.
  As I noted last month, when a full and robust debate has occurred, 
invoking cloture--a motion to end debate--is often appropriate. But we 
must not abuse this power by always seeking reflexively to cut off 
debate before it even begins. In the dark days of the previous 
Congress, we often saw such motions to cut off debate filed as soon as 
debate had begun, eviscerating any meaningful opportunity for 
considering the issues.
  The Senate desperately needed to return to a system where all 
Senators have a say in what the Senate does and are able to express 
their views without getting cut off at the pass. We are now returning 
to that system. We have resisted the temptation to cut off debate 
immediately.
  Under the majority leader's leadership, this body spent the better 
part of 3 weeks considering the Keystone XL Pipeline bill. During that 
time, Senators--both Republican and Democrat--enjoyed ample opportunity 
to voice their position on the bill as well as on our energy policy 
more broadly. This represents the exact sort of deliberate character 
the Senate was designed to embody.
  Indeed, the Democratic minority actually used more hours of floor 
debate on Keystone than did the Republican majority. To me, this is a 
remarkable statistic indicative of our new majority's commitment to 
treat the minority fairly and to approach individual

[[Page 2250]]

Senators, regardless of party, as valuable contributors to our work 
rather than as mindless partisans.
  The Senate was also designed to be the institution in our system of 
republican self-government that produced wise legislation. Popular 
passions, parochial interests, and factionalism--what Edmund Randolph 
called the ``turbulence and follies of democracy''--were to be defined 
in the Senate where smaller membership and larger constituencies and 
longer terms would improve the legislative product.
  These structural features of the Senate led to the development of a 
tradition in which individual Members were allowed to offer amendments 
freely--one of the primary mechanisms by which this body can refine 
legislation for the better. For centuries, this notion of an open 
amendment process has been at the core of the Senate's identity. But in 
recent years, many of us have bemoaned the demise of this tradition. In 
effect, one of this institution's most defining characteristics was 
emasculated for partisan political purposes. But the way we dealt with 
amendments over the course of the last month shows that the open 
amendment process is making a comeback.
  The majority leader shepherded through votes on more than 30 
amendments in January, more than double the amendment votes permitted 
by the Democrats in all of 2014. In fact, in 1 week alone, we voted on 
more amendments than the previous majority allowed us to vote on all of 
last year. There could be no clearer evidence of this body's 
resurgence.
  The facts speak for themselves. While one former Democratic Senator 
did not receive a vote on any of his amendments during the entire 
extent of his service in this body over the prior 6 years, the lone 
freshman Democrat Senator in this Congress, the junior Senator from 
Michigan, has already received a vote on one of his amendments in just 
the first few weeks of his service here. Truly, under this new 
majority, Senators of both parties are individually contributing to our 
work for the common good.
  A key part of returning to regular order is restoring the committee 
process. A healthy committee process is essential to a well-functioning 
Senate. In committees, Members are often best able to work together to 
debate, draft, and amend legislation that ultimately passes the Senate. 
We began resuscitating the committee process in our consideration of 
the Keystone XL Pipeline bill.
  I commend the tireless efforts of the distinguished Chair and ranking 
member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, who together 
masterfully led this body through recently unfamiliar territory of 
legislating through regular order.
  The Senator from Alaska merits particular praise for the skill she 
demonstrated in guiding this bill through the process, while the 
Senator from Washington should be lauded for her commitment to a fair 
and orderly process despite her opposition to the underlying policy. 
Their admirable work set an important example for the rest of us as we 
return to regular order in the 114th Congress by working together to 
improve legislation rather than simply trying to shut each other out of 
the process.
  I heard voices from some corners quibbling over certain elements of 
the Keystone debate process, but to focus on these criticisms misses 
the forest for the trees by fixating on one or two nitpicks and 
ignoring how deliberative and inclusive the process really was. We 
enjoyed open debate, ample opportunity to amend, and respect for 
committee expertise. This all contributed to the passage of a 
bipartisan bill.
  The proof is in the votes. Of the almost 50 votes on Keystone-related 
matters, few followed strict party lines, and the final bill won 
passage with 62 affirmative votes, including those of 9 Democrats. 
Twenty percent of Democrats present, nearly one-fifth of the caucus, 
voted for the Keystone bill. This was real bipartisanship.
  The result was a critically important piece of legislation that the 
President of the United States should sign into law. I urge him to do 
so. But that is not what we are hearing from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. 
No, the President has said he will veto the bill. In fact, he said he 
would veto it before we even took it up--before any amendments had even 
been offered.
  Instead, President Obama appears determined to ignore the will of the 
U.S. Congress, dismissing bills out of hand that have yet to reach his 
desk. I fail to see how this recalcitrance advances the cause of 
responsible governance or responds to the will of the American people 
who made their preferences clearly known at the ballot box last 
November.
  I, for one, will not let the President's irresponsible attitude 
toward this institution diminish my commitment to it. In fact, I call 
on each Senator to continue working to restore our Chamber's proper 
functioning. I urge all of us to participate actively in the committee 
process, help produce sound legislation, and carry out our 
institutional duties.
  The American people can then see for themselves the stark difference 
between a Senate that works and a White House that is unwilling to 
engage in genuine negotiation and compromise.
  I will close with a note on civility, that crucial ingredient we must 
never overlook, even in the heat of political discourse. I recall the 
words of Senator Chris Dodd, my friend, who represented Connecticut in 
this body for 30 years. In his final speech here on the Senate floor in 
late 2010, he reminded us that the Senate was intended to be a place 
where every Member's voice could be heard and where deliberation and 
even dissent would be valued and respected. As Senator Dodd explained, 
``Our Founders were concerned not only with what was legislated, but--
just as importantly--with how we legislated.''
  I have observed that debate on this floor during the past few weeks--
although tense at times--has on the whole been genuine, balanced, and 
respectful. We must remain true to this ethos as we continue to 
reinvigorate the debate and amendment process.
  In the weeks and months ahead, new disagreements will surely arise. 
This is when civility and statesmanship are most needed. We must each 
overcome whatever instincts may drive us away from civil discourse and 
toward anger, bitterness, petulance, or self-promotion.
  When this new Congress convened just over six weeks ago, I spoke of 
our collective duty to restore the Senate. I expressed my confidence 
that we could make the Senate work again by returning to regular order, 
promoting robust debate, and enabling an inclusive amendment process. 
We have made admirable progress over the last month. Our actions are 
backing up our rhetoric. Let us sustain this momentum.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. FISCHER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________