Senator John Thune, US Senator for South Dakota | Official U.S. Senate headshot
Senator John Thune, US Senator for South Dakota | Official U.S. Senate headshot
U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune addressed the Senate floor to express his frustration over the Democrats' decision to filibuster a bipartisan stablecoin bill. This marks the fourth time this year that Democrats have used the filibuster, according to Thune.
"Democrats have just used the filibuster for the fourth time this year," Thune stated. He questioned their reasoning, saying, "Well, in this case, no one really knows."
Thune emphasized that the bill in question was a product of bipartisan efforts from its inception. "It’s a bipartisan issue. It’s a bipartisan bill," he said. He argued that if Democrats wanted further changes, they could have pursued them on the Senate floor by voting for cloture.
He pointed out that not every bill is finalized when it reaches the floor and criticized what he described as past Democratic practices when they were in control. "Republicans are doing it differently," he noted, emphasizing their commitment to restoring traditional Senate procedures.
Thune highlighted that if cloture had been invoked, it would have allowed for open debate and further modifications. However, Democrats chose not to begin that debate.
The stablecoin bill underwent significant scrutiny and revision before reaching this point. Thune mentioned a three-hour markup session in the Banking Committee where 40 amendments were considered. The committee reported it favorably with an 18-6 vote, including support from five Democrats.
"There have been fully six versions of this bill," Thune explained, noting numerous modifications made to address Democratic concerns. Despite these efforts, he expressed confusion over what more could be done to satisfy them.
In closing his remarks, Thune speculated whether the opposition was less about the content of the bill and more about political maneuvering against Republicans or former President Trump. "I strongly support this bill," he concluded but added that he changed his vote to 'No' so it could be revisited when Democrats are ready for serious discussion.
Alerts Sign-up