[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 101 (Thursday, July 28, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 28, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
         NOMINATION OF STEPHEN BREYER TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT

  Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. President, I rise in support of the nomination 
of Judge Stephen Breyer to the U.S. Supreme Court.
  I have always taken very seriously my responsibility as a Senator to 
advise and consent on presidential nominations. In my mind, my role is 
not to confirm only those nominees who agree with me on political 
issues. I have never applied a litmus test on any subject, such as 
abortion and the death penalty for example, even though I have strong 
convictions about both.
  Regardless of the party in the White House, I have always asked three 
questions to determine whether presidential nominees deserve 
confirmation. First, does the nominee have the experience necessary to 
do the job? Second, does the nominee have the temperament to serve 
honorably? And finally, does the nominee have the character to be 
entrusted with the responsibility?
  Without a doubt, Stephen Breyer has the experience necessary to serve 
as a Supreme Court Justice. He has had an exemplary career in the 
executive, legislative, and judicial branches. He has served on the 
Federal bench for 14 years, and spent the last 4 years as chief judge 
of the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
  On the question of temperament, I believe Judge Breyer is qualified 
to serve on America's highest court. His decisions on the Federal bench 
have the reputation of being thoughtful and well-reasoned, without 
suggesting any particular political agenda. I trust he will continue to 
apply the law neutrally and fairly.
  And finally, based on the evidence that is available, I have 
concluded that Judge Breyer has the character necessary to be entrusted 
with a seat on the Supreme Court.
  I am aware that questions have been raised about Judge Breyer's 
membership in Lloyd's of London--a syndicate that underwrites insurance 
for corporations with potential liability for environmental cleanup 
costs--at the same time he was reviewing toxic waste cases as a Federal 
appeals judge.
  But there is no evidence that his decisions had a direct impact on 
any of his investments, and I believe Judge Breyer's assertion that his 
impartiality was not affected in any of those cases.
  Rather than showing a defect in character, I believe this was a case 
of bad judgment. My distinguished colleague from Indiana, Senator 
Lugar, has raised several valid points about the judgment that Judge 
Breyer exercised with respect to this investment.
  However, I have concluded that this single error in judgment should 
not, in itself, preclude membership on the Supreme Court. I do not 
think that a reasonable measure of any person is the worst mistake they 
ever made. Instead, I look at the entire record of accomplishment, his 
record of reasonable decisions, his record of diligent work for 
justice, his temperament and his character. By that measure, Stephen 
Breyer is worthy of a seat on the Supreme Court. That is why I will 
vote to confirm this nominee.

                          ____________________