releases: http://www.enzi.senate.gov//public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=10D3EC02-9111-4B1E-9BBB-64125602CA9C
Data license: MIT · Data source: dwillis/congress-press
This data as json
| url | title | date | year | month | party | chamber | state | member_name | bioguide_id | domain | scraper | source | date_source | text | has_text | collected_at | updated_at |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| http://www.enzi.senate.gov//public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=10D3EC02-9111-4B1E-9BBB-64125602CA9C | Enzi delivers farewell speech on Senate floor | 2020-12-02 | 2020 | 2020-12 | Republican | Senate | WY | Michael Enzi | E000285 | www.enzi.senate.gov | legacy | After serving 24 years in the U.S. Senate, Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., delivered his farewell speech today. During his remarks, Enzi offered advice for finding common ground, citing his 80 percent tool as an effective way of making change for the American people. It turns out that when we work together we can create a better bill than when we just try to do it alone or force others to accept our ideas, Enzi said on the U.S. Senate floor. That is why bipartisanship is not really about compromise. It is about what you leave out or finding a third way to accomplish a mutually agreeable goal. He also highlighted his office mission statement, which he said is guided by three principles: Doing what is right, doing our best, and treating others as they wish to be treated. I hope everyone listening especially my colleagues in the Senate remembers the core values I spoke of today, Enzi said. I truly believe that if we adhere to those ideals, the world will be a better place for our children and grandchildren. Enzi's remarks below (as prepared for delivery): Mr./Mrs. President, I rise today to give my farewell speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate. It has been the honor of a lifetime to serve the great people of Wyoming in this position for the last 24 years. I have really enjoyed being a senator. Not for the title, not for the recognition and certainly not for publicity. I love solving problems for folks in Wyoming and America. I like working on legislation. It might shock those who don't know me, but I never intended to get into politics! While I always had great respect for those who serve in public office, it wasn't my calling when I left college. But over fifty years ago, I joined a leadership and civic training group known as the Jaycees. While running their Leadership Training program in Cody, I met our keynote speaker Al Simpson. Simpson was serving at the time in our State Legislature and would go on to serve three terms in the U.S. Senate. After I gave my pitch on leadership training, and how important it was, Senator Simpson took me aside and said, I don't even know what party you're in, but it's time you put your money where your mouth is on this leadership stuff and get into politics. That town you live in, Gillette, needs a Mayor.' My wife Diana and I had moved to Gillette a few years earlier. The town was facing a crisis as the discovery of oil, gas and coal turned it into a boom town. The population started to skyrocket and city services were not keeping up. On the way home from that Cody meeting, while my wife was driving, I told her what Senator Simpson had said and that I was thinking maybe I should run for Mayor. It must have come as quite a shock because she ended up swerving down into the barrow pit and back up onto the road. We ended up talking about it seriously and the way we might be able to make a difference in our own town. I was new to the community, just 29 years old, but I thought Gillette was in need of a budget, agendas and planning - not the most exciting topics to get people's attention. I ran anyway and I won. Nearly 5 decades later, having served as a Mayor, State House Representative, State Senator, and U.S. Senator, I still find myself motivated by the urge to help my community and my country. I also find myself still pushing those same three ideas I did when I first ran for Mayor - budgets, agendas and planning. I keep finding myself wanting to help to solve problems. Once you embrace that responsibility it is hard to ever ignore it again. I have found that many of my colleagues in Congress tend to feel the same way. The Senate is a very different place from when I arrived in 1997, and it is a very different place than it was in 1789, when the very first Senate met. But over all those years, it has been a place for folks rising to the challenge of being a leader who are looking to make their communities and country a better place. We might not always agree on what the solutions are, but we can respect each other for working to find one. Over the years I have learned a great deal from those around me. Just like I listened to Senator Al Simpson all those years back, I have tried to keep an open mind to learning from others. And now that my time in the Senate is coming to a close, I would like to pass along some of the lessons I was taught, and some I learned the hard way, in the hope that they are useful for my colleagues working to get things accomplished in the Senate and for anyone who wants to be a leader in their community. In my office we have a mission statement. It reads: We have been given a sacred trust to work for our families, grandparents and grandchildren. We will respect the wisdom of those before and the future of those to follow. We will discharge this trust through our legislative policy, our constituent services and the way we treat each other, guided by these three principles: Doing What Is Right Doing Our Best Treating Others as They Wish to be Treated Those last three principles are advice my mom gave me, and they remain my core values. Every member of my staff is given that mission statement when they start, and we rely on it to remind us why we are here and how we should act. It isn't just a saying, but a way to work, a way to build trust and a way to govern. These values are not always easy to live by. We are all human and we can all struggle to live up to those ideals we set for ourselves. But that is why we call them ideals. I believe these are values we can all agree on, and by remembering the values we share, we can work together to tackle tough problems and find shared solutions. 'Do what is right' is a great slogan, but you might ask what it means at practical level. People see a mess in Washington, so how do we actually make progress? I believe it involves focusing on common ground over compromise, especially when it comes to legislating. People sometimes think compromise is the answer. I think it means I give in to something I don't like, and you give into something you don't like, and then we wind up with something no one likes. It's not legislating. But when it comes to legislating, often the best way to get something everyone can agree on is to leave out the things you don't agree on, and focus on what you can get done. That is why I suggest my 80 percent tool.' Generally speaking, people can talk civilly on 80 percent of the issues. It's only about 20 percent of issues where you will find real contention. Now even on the individual issues you might find disagreement, but once again you need to focus on the 80 percent of that issue that you can agree on. It is all about focusing on what you can get done, and not focusing on the points of disagreement the weeds of debate that have choked issues. Or to say it another way, it's all about what you leave out. Former Senator Ted Kennedy, from Massachusetts, and I used this tool when we led the Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee together and it worked great. It worked even though we were on complete opposite sides of the political spectrum. I once showed Senator Kennedy an article that mentioned how unusual it was for the most conservative senator and the third most liberal senator to work together. To which he said, So who's ahead of me?!' We were able to get legislation passed that others had been trying to do for years. Here's how we started working together. When I first got to the Senate I wanted to change some things with OSHA. Senator Kennedy, at the urging of my predecessor Senator Simpson, let me sit him down and take him through the bill a section at a time. That's something we did in the Wyoming legislature. When we marked up the bill in committee, Senator Kennedy said, In all my years in the Senate, I've never had anybody take me through a bill a section at a time. But I'm still going to have to vote against it.' It still got out of committee, but later he called me about a safety bill he'd been working on for over a decade a bill to save nurses and medical janitors from accidental needle sticks and asked if I'd take a look at it. I did, and the biggest suggestion I gave was to leave out a couple of the small parts that had been jamming up the bill. The bill passed the Senate and the House unamended and was signed. Now you see needle stick disposals everywhere and the issue has never had to be readdressed. Later I became the HELP Chair and Senator Kennedy was the Ranking Member. We used the 80 percent tool. We were able to get 35 bills through the HELP Committee in the 109th Congress. Twenty-seven of them made their way to the president's desk and were signed into public law. And, in between, we were able to report out 352 nominations for consideration by the full Senate. So here's how the 80 percent tool worked. At the beginning of each year each of made a list of the issues we thought the committee should take up. We compared lists. We made an effort for some to be on both lists. Then we worked on the ones on both lists. We usually had duplication of about 80 percent of the issues. Then we could pick out any issue and work on it, usually agreeing on about 80 percent of that issue. If we couldn't find a new way to do the part that had been argued about for years, we simply left it out, believing that 80 percent finished is better than 20 percent that only makes the press. This is the 80 percent tool and it is where our energy, attention and talents could be focused in the Senate. If we just work on the 20 percent that we don't agree on and will never agree on we will only generate headlines about how hard we are working, with nothing actually getting done just gridlock. When the news comes on, people see us working in the Senate. If we are arguing and bickering and getting nothing done, we are focusing too much on that 20 percent. If people do not see much of us, that means we are taking on the 80 percent and making progress, without headlines and often with unanimous consent. What we are really talking about is working together. That is what the heart of the 80 percent tool is. Oftentimes people say what we need is more bipartisanship, and there is a very practical reason for that. In the Senate, you can't get anything done without working with the other side unless one party has 60 votes or more, which is rare. And even then, the bills that either party passes when they have a supermajority are usually pretty flawed. It turns out that when we work together we can create a better bill than when we just try to do it alone or force others to accept our ideas. That is why success is not really about compromise. It is about what you leave out or finding a third way to accomplish a mutually agreeable new way. We used to take the people that had similar amendments and send them off to see if they could come up with one amendment. And quite often they could. It was then fascinating when they came back they said, It was my idea.' When all of them report it was their idea, you know you have enough votes to pass it. Here are a few key steps that I use to help find that common ground to pass legislation. First, find someone from the other side of the aisle who likes to legislate. Second, discover and agree on common goals. Third, consult with stakeholders that will or could be affected by the changes being discussed. Fourth, hold roundtables instead of hearings. With hearings, each side beats up on the other's witnesses with clever stump the professor' type questions. At a roundtable, people who have actually done something on the policy issue share their real life experiences. And finally, you set aside those issues you can't agree on for another day's debate. Now you have a bill that has a good chance of being passed and signed into law. This is the heart of the 80 percent tool. This way of working also ensures that we can disagree without being disagreeable. There is a lot of vitriol in our politics and our world right now, but you can stay true to what you believe in without treating others badly. Nothing gets done when we are just telling each other how wrong we are. Just ask yourself, has anyone ever really changed your opinion by getting up in your face and yelling at you, or saying how wrong you are? Usually that doesn't change hearts or minds. That might make someone feel better in the moment, but it doesn't do much for getting anything accomplished. Following the 80 percent tool will not get you notoriety, fame or even the headlines. Most media coverage requires blood in the water.' However, the ability to work among your peers using this method can and will move us forward and get things done. This tool is only successful if we are actually working on passing legislation together. And that means letting the Senate work as it was intended. One of the best ways to do that is to allow the members of each committee to actually take the time to craft bills. The committees are where the experts are, and where I think some of the best work gets done. I have already made it clear that I don't think hearings are overly useful, and often are wasted on collecting soundbites for the evening news. Instead we should be encouraging committees to give their members more say in crafting legislation and working together on the best solutions. If you look at the bills that pass with strong bipartisan support, they are usually because flaws were ironed out in committee. Legislation is oftentimes at its best when it has taken its time in the committees, being hashed out until it is ready for primetime. Now you might not always be able to get everyone on board, but if you have done it right, you should see strong bipartisan support. Sometimes this also means letting others take credit for your ideas. An old salesman trick is to convince others that your good idea was really their good idea. Don't let your vanity stand in the way of getting the job done. Too often in the modern Senate, legislation is rushed out of committee to the Senate floor. And then once it hits the Senate floor, both sides try to prevent amendments. But the process of allowing amendments and debate is a core component of how the Senate was designed to operate. Without it, the Senate can get gummed up. The gears can get jammed. Without the fresh air that new ideas and legitimate debate brings, tensions can rise as senators feel unable to make progress. The difficulty is that each party is so worried about the next election, looking to hold onto the majority, that everybody is either trying to force the other side to take politically perilous votes, or trying to avoid taking those votes themselves. No matter which party is in charge, we end up blocking amendments and shying away from allowing legislation to be altered on the floor of the Senate. I have come up with some solutions on getting spending bills passed, such as biennial budgeting, but that won't solve our problems for every bill. It might help if members make it clear to their leadership that they would be willing to take some tough votes in return for more chances to amend major legislation on the floor. People might be less likely to demand votes on a poison pill or messaging amendment designed to put the other party in a tough spot if they knew they could face the same treatment! In the end, the onus is on the members of the Senate, on us, to take a on the responsibility to work together in return for the chance to pass legislation. Another more practical solution would be to try and avoid passing comprehensive legislation. Comprehensive bills are so large that everyone can find a reason to vote against it! Senator Alexander is a big promoter of step-by-step legislating. This practical solution would avoid passing comprehensive legislation. Comprehensive legislation is usually the byproduct of compromise, not common ground, and often ends up being so big it is incomprehensible. Giant bills that try to do everything usually end up with too many unintended consequences and include a litany of unrelated pieces of legislation that are merely hitching a ride, because otherwise they would never be able to hold up on their own merits. It isn't a new strategy, but the number of key pieces of legislation that are passed by two members going into a room, crafting legislation, and then presenting it to Congress as a whole without allowing any amendments has increased dramatically during my tenure in the Senate. And then we as members are left merely with an up or down vote. These Christmas tree' bills are often designed so that if you vote against it, no matter who you are, you will be voting against some key legislation that you would have supported had it been its own bill. Once again, the ugly nature of compromise' over common ground' is clear. A simple solution I have proposed would be to pass more bills as individual pieces of legislation that step-by-step. In Wyoming, bills have to be focused on a single subject, and all amendments need to be relevant. In the past I have introduced a bill that would require that here considered by the Senate to be limited to a single issue, but to my dismay, it has never really been treated seriously. To talk on a little different issue, my favorite Article of the Constitution is Article 5. It assures that all states will have equal representation in the Senate. And since I come from one of those low population states, it's very important to us. My state is often criticized for being over represented in the Senate. We have two senators, the same as California, New York and Texas. But in this argument of unfair representation for states, we find the same inherent issue as we do with the filibuster; our government was not set up to be majority rule by population alone. Our founders, through their own debate, were able to understand the risk of a pure democracy and the benefits of a federalist system, where ideas were represented not just by population, but by regions and shared cultures. Wyomingites deserve to have their cultural say in our system, protected against the majority. We are all in the United States of America! The Senate represents more than just the people. To protect the individuality of the states, of the culture of those who live in those regions of the county less populated, it also represents the states that founded our federalist system.Of course, at that time several of them had little population. We have covered a lot of ground. But for my last piece of advice, I call on my colleagues to recognize that it is time to formally allow electronics on the floor of the United States Senate. It is an issue near and dear to my heart, and one I think will help how we work in the Senate. It is clear to anyone who watches C-SPAN that all of us are already breaking the spirit of the law, checking our phones on occasion as we walk off the floor. These devices are now inseparable from our ability to do our work. We rely on them to do almost everything. It is time we make this commonsense change, allowing iPads to be used for speeches as long as they're laid on the lectern like a paper speech. And if senators could so some work from their desks like early senators had to do, we would listen to more of the speeches and get a lot more done. I do remember when I brought that one up before that it was covered by the press in '97! They thought it was important that we have that use. TIME Magazine did a special article on it. I remember Senator McConnell going to New York City and coming back to report to me that he got in a cab. The cab driver said, you're a United States senator, aren't you?' And of course he proudly was. And the guy said, So when are you going to let the guy from Wyoming have his computer on the floor?!' So Senator McConnell told me if I had lobbied it down to cabbies that it was time to do it. But we still haven't done it. As we move forward, our country has no shortage of problems we need to address. Some are out of our control, but many are of our own making. If my experience over the years has taught me anything, it is that we will never be able to tackle these challenges unless we find common areas of agreement first and work to solve those problems together. I hope everyone listening - especially my colleagues in the Senate - remembers the core values I spoke of today. Do what's right, do your best, and treat others as they wish to be treated. I truly believe that if we adhere to those ideals, the world will be a better place for our children and grandchildren. I want to once again thank the people of Wyoming for giving me the opportunity to serve them. I also want to thank my colleagues and friends who supported me over the years. I want to thank all the amazing staff I have had over the years, in my personal office in D.C., in my state offices in Wyoming, and my staff both on the Health Education, Labor and Pension Committee and Budget Committee. Over the years, I've gotten to work with an incredible staff that have made it possible to do more than a Senator by him or herself could ever do. Thank you for working so hard over the years! I also give the most thanks my family and all their support over the years, especially my wife Diana. It has been a long journey since I first told Diana I was thinking of running for Mayor. You have supported me more than anyone can truly comprehend. In no uncertain terms, I couldn't have done it without you. It has been more than 50 amazing years together, and I look forward to our next adventure together. Mr./Mrs. President, I yield the floor. | 1 | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z |