Bipartisanship (Executive Session)

In an executive session, Senator Lummis spoke about the Senate’s role in working across party lines, saying senators should debate bills on their merits rather than block them for political reasons. She cited Democratic blocking of debate on a major military funding bill and a bill requiring people to prove citizenship to vote as examples. No other statements were sampled.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

1 statement

Cynthia M. Lummis, WY

Republican
“Senators need to work together and stop blocking bills just to hurt the other party. Democrats recently blocked debate on a major military funding bill, and they are blocking a bill that requires people to prove they are citizens to vote. We were sent here to debate bills on their merits and govern, no matter who is president.”
Official Congressional Record

Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the basic duty we all took an oath to carry out--and whether we are living up to it. The U.S. Senate was never designed to be easy. It was designed to be deliberate, to force people who disagree to sit in the same room and work something out anyway. That only works if everyone here still believes in the underlying premise that we were sent to govern no matter who is the President. The goal is not to defeat the other side for its own sake but to do the hard, unglamourous work of running this country together, in good faith, even when we would rather not. Americans did not send Republicans and Democrats to Washington expecting us to agree on everything. In fact, my constituents would be very concerned if we did. They sent us here expecting us to take the job seriously. That means engaging with the substance in front of us, debating it, amending it, fighting for it on the merits, rather than reflexively blocking whatever comes to the floor simply because of who sits in the White House. Last week, this Chamber fell short. There is a real difference between principled opposition and blind obstruction, and the American people can tell which one they are watching. Opposing a policy because you believe it is wrong for the country is exactly what this institution is built for. Opposing something simply because you dislike the President and you are trying to jam him when there is international conflict is something else entirely, and it corrodes the very system we are sworn to protect. I was very troubled to watch every Senate Democrat vote against even beginning the debate on the National Defense Authorization Act, a bill that has, historically, enjoyed strong bipartisan backing. Now, I am not suggesting Members can’t or shouldn’t oppose the NDAA when they have genuine concerns; that is a legitimate part of the process. Voting no is often the easy move around here, and I have done it myself when I thought it was warranted. But this looked less like principled opposition and more like reflexive obstruction, a decision to block the process itself rather than engage with the substance of an important bill. I also think of the SAVE America Act when I say this because it is a case in point. Here is a bill built around a premise that 83 percent of the American people--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike-- already agree on, that only citizens should decide American elections and that voters should be able to prove who they are when they cast a ballot. This is not fringe. This is not one party’s obsession. It is about as close to consensus as the American people get on anything these days. And yet it cannot get a real hearing on the merits in this Chamber-- not a real debate, just a wall. That is not principled opposition. That is the process itself being blocked on a question the country has largely answered. Good faith is not a partisan virtue. It doesn’t belong to one side of the aisle or the other. It is the minimum the American people are owed by everyone who serves here. They are watching to see whether we can still disagree honestly, argue our positions openly and persuasively, and still find a way to get the Nation’s business done. When we can’t, when the obstruction becomes the default setting instead of the exception, we are not defending the Constitution. We are quietly letting it fail. We are stewards of something bigger than any one bill or any one election cycle. We are stewards of a system that only survives if the people who serve in it still believe in doing the work, in doing the right thing, in doing what the Constitution outlines is our duty to the American people. That is what Americans expect of us. It is time we start living up to it every single day, not just when it is politically convenient. I yield the floor. (Mr. ROUNDS assumed the chair.)

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from issue 118

  1. House of Representatives Honoring Life of Douglas Graham 4 statements
  2. House of Representatives Recognizing Larry "the Grinch" Stone 2 statements
  3. House of Representatives Commemorating 82nd Anniversary of Liberation of Guam 2 statements
  4. House of Representatives Choices for Increased Mobility Act of 2026 5 statements
  5. House of Representatives Destruction of Hazardous Imports Act 6 statements
  6. House of Representatives FDA Modernization Act 3.0 6 statements
  7. House of Representatives Reauthorizing the Kay Hagan Tick Act 6 statements
  8. House of Representatives Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Reauthorization Act of 2025 6 statements
  9. House of Representatives Accelerating Access to Dementia and Alzheimer's Provider Training Act 6 statements
  10. House of Representatives Action for Dental Health Act 7 statements
  11. House of Representatives Programs to Prevent, Detect, and Treat Traumatic Brain Injuries 4 statements
  12. House of Representatives Early Act Reauthorization of 2025 7 statements
  13. House of Representatives Deondra Dixon Include Project Act of 2025 5 statements
  14. House of Representatives NIH Implementing a Maternal Health and Pregnancy Outcomes Vision for Everyone Act 7 statements
  15. House of Representatives Accelerating Access to Critical Therapies for Als Reauthorization Act of 2026 6 statements
  16. House of Representatives Putting Patients First by Strengthening Provider Accountability in Feca Act 6 statements
  17. House of Representatives Value over Cost Act of 2026 3 statements
  18. House of Representatives Ensuring Federal Purchasing Efficiency Act 6 statements
  19. House of Representatives Stop Secret Spending Act of 2025 6 statements
  20. House of Representatives Federal Improvement in Technology Procurement Act 4 statements
  21. House of Representatives Federal Relocation Payment Improvement Act 5 statements
  22. House of Representatives Billion Dollar Boondoggle Act 5 statements
  23. House of Representatives Expanding Whistleblower Protections for Contractors Act of 2026 3 statements
  24. House of Representatives Nucleic Acid Standards for Biosecurity Act 5 statements
  25. House of Representatives Next-Generation Geothermal Research and Development Act 7 statements
  26. House of Representatives Recognizing 100th Anniversary of Long Island Association 9 statements
  27. House of Representatives Honoring the Life and Legacy of Congressman John Lewis 4 statements
  28. Senate Bipartisanship (Executive Session) 1 statement
  29. Senate Cloture Motion (Executive Calendar) 2 statements
  30. Senate Order for Adjournment 17 statements