A Quote by Dick Durbin

I certainly want to be the whip, and that's an election every two years in the Senate Democratic caucus. — © Dick Durbin
I certainly want to be the whip, and that's an election every two years in the Senate Democratic caucus.
I have been in the Democratic Caucus in the Senate for over 24 years.
Which of the following two groups contains the most former grand dragons of the Ku Klux Klan - the first 59 Tea Party people you run into this morning, or the U.S. Senate Democratic caucus?
As Democratic losses mounted in Senate races across the country on election night, some liberal commentators clung to the idea that dissatisfied voters were sending a generally anti-incumbent message, and not specifically repudiating Democratic officeholders. But the facts of the election just don't support that story.
I want to caucus in Iowa. I'll caucus all over the state. I don't caucus in California. You don't caucus where you live. It doesn't look good.
It took us 200 years to elect the first Democratic woman to the Senate in her own right, and that's Barbara Mikulski. Six years later, we had a grand slam: We elected four new Democratic women to the Senate. Sen. Mikulski now has some company.
I want to continue to serve as whip of the caucus.
You know, there were 29 Democratic votes for censure in the Senate. And if the Republicans had any sense, they would have censured him before the '98 midterm election, and they would have won the election.
We wouldn't even be where we are had it not been that 70% of Hispanics voted for President Obama, voted Democratic in the last election. That caused an epiphany in the Senate, that's for sure. So all of a sudden we have already passed comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate. That's a big victory.
We tend to think of the House as a less historically significant legislative body than the Senate. There are more representatives than there are senators, they're up for re-election every two years, and many come and go without having much of an impact.
For Democrats who are feeling completely discouraged, I've been trying to remind them, everybody remembers my Boston speech in 2004. They may not remember me showing up here in 2005 when John Kerry had lost a close election, Tom Daschle, the leader of the Senate, had been beaten in an upset. Ken Salazar and I were the only two Democrats that won nationally. Republicans controlled the Senate and the House, and two years later, Democrats were winning back Congress, and four years later I was President of the United States.
We [Democrats] have become a party of assembling all these different groups, the women's caucus and the black caucus and the Hispanic caucus and the lesbian-gay-transgender caucus and so forth, and that doesn't relate to people out in rural America.
I want to be really clear that the Hispanic Caucus - well before my time on that caucus, and certainly before my time as chairwoman - has been very clear that a guiding principle for comprehensive immigration reform, and for issues related to Dreamers, is that a wall is a nonstarter.
For the institutions of the European Union are at present incomplete. A European Senate is badly needed to complete them. By creating an upper chamber in the European parliament, a new bridge could be built between national political classes, which retain democratic legitimacy, and the decision-making process in Brussels. Such a Senate should be recruited by indirect election from exisiting national parliaments.
As a whole, the election process before the election and on the day of election was successful, and I think Azerbaijan had normal and democratic elections.
I think a core principle of the Democratic Party has to be a defense of equal rights for every American. At the same time, when you look at the election, and not just the 2016 election, but the elections to come, Democrats have to do better than we did in 2016 in communities, in rural communities where people feel like they've been in a slow burn recession or depression for years, not just months.
It's been 80 years since the Senate has confirmed a Supreme Court nominee who was nominated during an election. And particularly when the court hangs in the balance, it makes no sense whatsoever to give Barack Obama the power to jam through a judge in the final election year.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!