But it also meant that on the other legislation there was more bipartisanship because you had more interest if there wasn't going to be a filibuster to be involved with it. And so to me, Reforming the filibuster to go back to a traditional role as a speaking filibuster. one where if you want to hold the floor, you can hold it and nothing else moves. But there will have a cost to that. If you say you object, why do you object? (21:11–21:16)
CLAIM
Asserts that the filibuster should be reformed to its traditional role.
This is an excerpt from a raw transcript. The assertions have not been audited or verified. Tap the video to view the source footage and understand the context.
