This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/08/opinion/harry-reid-farewell-fair-senate.html
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Harry Reid: Farewell, Fair Senate | Harry Reid: Farewell, Fair Senate |
| (about 13 hours later) | |
| Washington — In my time in the Senate, I’ve served with 281 senators. I’ve rarely given advice unless asked. But since I am leaving the Senate floor for the final time, I have a few things to say. | Washington — In my time in the Senate, I’ve served with 281 senators. I’ve rarely given advice unless asked. But since I am leaving the Senate floor for the final time, I have a few things to say. |
| To Republicans, I say recognize the difference between campaigning and governing, and beware of knee-jerk opposition to the accomplishments of the Obama era. | To Republicans, I say recognize the difference between campaigning and governing, and beware of knee-jerk opposition to the accomplishments of the Obama era. |
| Despite the fact that your nominee lost the popular vote by nearly three million votes, your leaders have announced their intention to repeal the Affordable Care Act early in the next Congress, with no replacement. This is a dramatic misreading of your mandate. It will lead you into a quagmire that will cause pain for millions of Americans and bedevil you for the next four years. | Despite the fact that your nominee lost the popular vote by nearly three million votes, your leaders have announced their intention to repeal the Affordable Care Act early in the next Congress, with no replacement. This is a dramatic misreading of your mandate. It will lead you into a quagmire that will cause pain for millions of Americans and bedevil you for the next four years. |
| Repealing Obamacare will take health insurance away from millions of Americans — as many as 30 million, by one recent estimate. It will raise premiums and throw health insurance markets into disarray. Public support for repeal is low, and support for repeal without a replacement is in the basement. | Repealing Obamacare will take health insurance away from millions of Americans — as many as 30 million, by one recent estimate. It will raise premiums and throw health insurance markets into disarray. Public support for repeal is low, and support for repeal without a replacement is in the basement. |
| If you continue down this path, you will be letting your reflexive opposition to President Obama’s legacy cloud your judgment. I was in the Senate when President George W. Bush misread his mandate and sought to privatize Social Security. His administration never recovered. | If you continue down this path, you will be letting your reflexive opposition to President Obama’s legacy cloud your judgment. I was in the Senate when President George W. Bush misread his mandate and sought to privatize Social Security. His administration never recovered. |
| To Democrats, I say it has never been more important to stand up for the things we believe in. We are entering a new Gilded Age. Next year, a billionaire president who just settled a fraud suit for $25 million over his business exploits will be pushing tax cuts for the top 1 percent, supposedly in the name of populism. | To Democrats, I say it has never been more important to stand up for the things we believe in. We are entering a new Gilded Age. Next year, a billionaire president who just settled a fraud suit for $25 million over his business exploits will be pushing tax cuts for the top 1 percent, supposedly in the name of populism. |
| Much of the responsibility for separating what is real and what is fake will fall on Democrats. We should ask ourselves: Do the choices we make about how we spend our time keep us in touch with what we believe in, and what is real in our own lives? | Much of the responsibility for separating what is real and what is fake will fall on Democrats. We should ask ourselves: Do the choices we make about how we spend our time keep us in touch with what we believe in, and what is real in our own lives? |
| For me, one of those choices has been to spend as much time as possible with the people who know me and know where I came from: a town called Searchlight. In the more than three decades I’ve been in Washington, there have by my count been 136 various press correspondents’ dinners. I’ve been to one. And I might hold the record for spending as little time at fund-raisers as possible; I am usually in and out of the door in 10 minutes or less. | For me, one of those choices has been to spend as much time as possible with the people who know me and know where I came from: a town called Searchlight. In the more than three decades I’ve been in Washington, there have by my count been 136 various press correspondents’ dinners. I’ve been to one. And I might hold the record for spending as little time at fund-raisers as possible; I am usually in and out of the door in 10 minutes or less. |
| One thing we fought for that’s worth defending is a fairer, more open and more productive Senate. We changed the Senate rules to guarantee a president’s nominees a fair, simple-majority vote, and declared that a president’s nominees should not be stymied with procedural hurdles and a requirement for supermajority votes. (Supreme Court nominations still have this requirement.) | One thing we fought for that’s worth defending is a fairer, more open and more productive Senate. We changed the Senate rules to guarantee a president’s nominees a fair, simple-majority vote, and declared that a president’s nominees should not be stymied with procedural hurdles and a requirement for supermajority votes. (Supreme Court nominations still have this requirement.) |
| We declared that the changes should apply regardless of which party was in the White House, because fair votes are what democracy is all about. I doubt any of us envisioned Donald J. Trump’s becoming the first president to take office under the new rules. But what was fair for President Obama is fair for President Trump. | We declared that the changes should apply regardless of which party was in the White House, because fair votes are what democracy is all about. I doubt any of us envisioned Donald J. Trump’s becoming the first president to take office under the new rules. But what was fair for President Obama is fair for President Trump. |
| Moreover, the rule change has been a victory for those who want to see a functioning, open and transparent Senate. It allowed Mr. Obama’s judicial nominees to receive the fair consideration they deserved. Without the rule change, Republicans would have been able to hold open three seats on our nation’s second highest court, the District of Columbia Circuit Court, until the next Republican administration. The judges we confirmed to those seats will loom large in the years to come. In 2014 alone, the Senate confirmed 89 Circuit and District Court judges, more than for any year in two decades. | Moreover, the rule change has been a victory for those who want to see a functioning, open and transparent Senate. It allowed Mr. Obama’s judicial nominees to receive the fair consideration they deserved. Without the rule change, Republicans would have been able to hold open three seats on our nation’s second highest court, the District of Columbia Circuit Court, until the next Republican administration. The judges we confirmed to those seats will loom large in the years to come. In 2014 alone, the Senate confirmed 89 Circuit and District Court judges, more than for any year in two decades. |
| The rule change was consistent with the history of the Senate, which has continually evolved when faced with new challenges. Historically, the only way to reject nominees to cabinet posts, which are not lifetime appointments, has been by a simple-majority vote. Moreover, the supermajority threshold for bills and nominations is not in the Constitution, nor was it in the original Senate rules. | The rule change was consistent with the history of the Senate, which has continually evolved when faced with new challenges. Historically, the only way to reject nominees to cabinet posts, which are not lifetime appointments, has been by a simple-majority vote. Moreover, the supermajority threshold for bills and nominations is not in the Constitution, nor was it in the original Senate rules. |
| From George Washington to George W. Bush, only 68 presidential nominees had been filibustered. Senate Republicans took obstruction to a new level, filibustering 79 of Mr. Obama’s nominees in just four years. By removing such procedural ploys, the rule change puts the debate over nominees out in the open. Senators have to answer a simple question: Should a nominee be confirmed, or not? Nominees are now guaranteed a floor vote. | |
| With Republicans holding a slim majority, Democrats have a fighting chance at winning every debate. To be sure, persuading a majority of the Senate to your side is harder than blocking a confirmation on a procedural vote. But it is also fairer. | With Republicans holding a slim majority, Democrats have a fighting chance at winning every debate. To be sure, persuading a majority of the Senate to your side is harder than blocking a confirmation on a procedural vote. But it is also fairer. |
| When Democrats pick their fights next year, they can do so knowing that, win or lose, they will be debating in a Senate that we made fairer, more open and more transparent. If Democrats stand for what they believe in, they will find that trusting the courage of their convictions while out of power will empower them to accomplish great things when the pendulum swings back, as it always does. | When Democrats pick their fights next year, they can do so knowing that, win or lose, they will be debating in a Senate that we made fairer, more open and more transparent. If Democrats stand for what they believe in, they will find that trusting the courage of their convictions while out of power will empower them to accomplish great things when the pendulum swings back, as it always does. |