Search legislation

Most Recent Comments

1) "journal statement"  by Admin003 on October 3, 2008 
Senator Cherry’s statement is as follows:

We are about one month away from an election, a little bit more than one month. I know that today is a day of politics. I think we all know that we have all been through a number of bills which are there specifically for politics. And, yet, as was said earlier by the other Senators, when we rose to object, as we should in this political system, we got cut out. I can’t go further to explain any more than what my colleagues have already explained. But I think it is also important that we all say what really happened here today—a day when we have a political day, getting ready for an election in which we fought for our side, and which we were again punished for that. This is not the first time, as you all know. It is at least the second and maybe even more than that.

I, again, urge my colleagues to have a bipartisan atmosphere in the chamber and to respect each other because as was said earlier, we all do represent 270,000 citizens. We all do have a right to our opinion, and we have a right to our say.

Reply

2) "journal statement"  by Admin003 on October 3, 2008 
Senator Whitmer’s statement, in which Senator Jacobs concurred, is as follows:

Today alone, we have heard people give speeches about bipartisanship and then turn around and move to punish Democrats for having the audacity for disagreeing here on the floor by sending a bunch of Democratic bills to the Committee on Government Operations and Reform. Now does that make the talk of bipartisanship disingenuous? Well, to put it lightly, yes.

Now you want to talk about maintaining decorum? You cut off debate today by Democratic members citing the traditions of the Senate, but then turned around and made an exception for a Republican member on the next vote. And then you agreed that, okay, we’ll let a Democrat speak, but first you exacted a promise out of that Democrat that they are going to be “nice.” I was standing right there when it happened.

So you want to talk about the traditions of the Senate? You want to talk about decorum? You want to talk about bipartisanship? Well, here’s the irony: One of the bills that you re-referred today has my name on the bill. Yes, it says “Whitmer.” But, the truth be told, it is a bill drafted by one of your members for one of his constituents that he asked me to introduce, and I did so in the spirit of bipartisanship. I agreed to put my name on it to help him out. Now that’s ironic, but it also underscores the very reason that I voted “no” on the motion to refer the bills.

Reply

3) "journal statement"  by Admin003 on October 3, 2008 
Senator Prusi’s statement is as follows:

This is my second “no” vote explanation of the day and probably more than I have offered up in years. I am not typically one to complain or one to explain, but I do feel it is necessary to explain my “no” vote. There have been calls on the floor here—calls in various committees—that we need to get together; we need to work in a bipartisan fashion, and I think if you go back in the record, and I’ve got videotaped evidence of me mentioning those same words and offering that same cooperation in the past, but bipartisanship by definition involves two parties. It involves a two-way street. You cannot come up with some sort of a plan, throw it in front of us, say we’ve discussed it, ask us to bless it, and call it bipartisanship. There is a two-way street, and it has to be genuine. It cannot be something that is a façade. It cannot be something that can be put on simply for the sake of showing someone that you’re bipartisan when there is no real meat behind it.

I’ve offered bipartisan cooperation in the past. I’ll continue to hold out the hope that at some point in my legislative career I’ll actually see it happen around here, but that hope is dimming by the day here because I don’t see a two-way street. I see the one-way majority ramming things down our throats whenever you feel a political need. We are in a political season, but let’s not pretend that all the politics comes from one side of the aisle.

Reply

View Full Conversation