[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 145 (Friday, October 7, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 7, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
    JUDGE WILLIAM W. WILKINS, JR., CHAIR, UNITED STATES SENTENCING 
                               COMMISSION

  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, for more than two centuries of this 
Nation's history, Federal judges were the ultimate authority in 
sentencing defendants who appeared in their courts. Such power, while 
attractive to members of the bench, led to great disparities in how 
people were sentenced, from judge to judge, and even from case to case. 
It became apparent to those of us on the Judiciary Committee that this 
disparity could not stand, and that some sort of Federal sentencing 
guidelines needed to be established to ensure, that convicted criminals 
were sentenced uniformly and fairly for the crimes they committed. In 
an effort to achieve this goal, the Congress passed the Sentencing 
Reform Act in 1984, which created the U.S. Sentencing Commission.
  As many of you may remember, our legislation required that the 
Commission be composed of seven voting members, three of whom would be 
Federal judges selected by the President from a list compiled by the 
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. When I learned that my good friend 
and former member of my Senate staff, Judge William ``Billy'' Wilkins, 
Jr. was being considered for the Commission, I immediately contacted 
President Reagan and urged him to give Judge Wilkins every possible 
consideration. My enthusiastic support of Judge Wilkins was motivated 
by my knowledge of this man's impressive qualifications, ones that were 
ideally suited to master the challenging job of chairing the Sentencing 
Commission.
  Since his days as a law student at the University of South Carolina, 
Billy Wilkins has distinguished himself in each and all of his 
undertakings. At Carolina he earned a reputation for excellence by 
winning the prestigious position of editor of the South Carolina Law 
Review; serving as captain of the moot court team; and, being a member 
of the Wig and Robe. His 3 years of curricular and extra curricular 
activities earned him the respect of the faculty at South Carolina's 
law school, which awarded him the title of Outstanding Graduate of the 
Year.
  Upon his graduation from law school, Billy Wilkins entered the U.S. 
Army and began what has become a career dedicated to the service of the 
Nation. He continued his service by clerking for a Federal judge, 
before moving to Washington and becoming a capable and valued member of 
my Senate staff. It was during his time working for me in Washington 
that I recognized the great potential of this bright, young attorney, 
and I predicted that he would go far in his career.
  After leaving Washington, Billy returned to South Carolina where he 
ran successfully for the position of district attorney of the largest 
judicial circuit in South Carolina. His record as a prosecutor was so 
well respected that when he sought re-election, District Attorney 
Wilkins' bid was endorsed by both the Republican and the Democratic 
Parties. That is clearly a telling testament to the high regard people 
hold for this man.
  Billy's tenure as a district attorney led him down a trail that 
eventually saw him nominated as a Federal district judge for the 
district of South Carolina. It was from that position that he was 
appointed to the Chair of the Sentencing Commission. Since then, he has 
been elevated to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, where he has 
served since 1986.
  Mr. President, I am not exaggerating when I say that the work that 
Judge Wilkins and the Sentencing Commission have done over the past 8 
years has had a tremendous and positive impact on the American criminal 
justice system. While there are those who dislike the guidelines and 
policies that the Commission has established, I have no doubt that time 
will validate the work of these fine men and women. A recent issue of 
Legal Times included an article about Judge Wilkins and his leadership 
of the Commission. I found it to be an accurate and fair account of 
what my friend has accomplished and I would like to share it with each 
of you. I ask unanimous consent be given to insert this article in the 
Record following my remarks.
  While I am truly sorry to see Judge Wilkins step down as Chairman of 
the Commission, I know that he takes great satisfaction and pride in 
what has been accomplished under his leadership. I am proud of Judge 
Wilkins as a jurist and a friend, and I wish him good health, 
happiness, and success in all his future undertakings.

                 [From the Legal Times, Sept. 19, 1994]

                 Wilkins' Tenure Transformed The Courts

                         (By Naftali Bendavid)

       Billy Wilkins' name is unlikely to pop up on many lists of 
     the 20th century's most influential judges. Louis Brandeis, 
     perhaps. Earl Warren, certainly. But not William Wilkins Jr.
       Yet the changes wrought by Wilkins--who is stepping down as 
     the only chairman that the eight-year-old U.S. Sentencing 
     Commission has had to date--are arguably as profound as those 
     brought about by the era's more famous jurists.
       With a laserlike single-mindedness, Wilkins has helped 
     transform U.S. jurisprudence, creating a sentencing 
     guidelines system after two centuries in which judges had 
     almost unlimited power to punish or forgive. And he's done it 
     under a withering barrage of vilification from other judges--
     Wilkins' own colleagues and friends--who consider him a 
     traitor for curtailing their power.
       ``I've seen judges stand up in his face and say, `You have 
     just ruined the system,''' says Judge G. Ross Anderson Jr. of 
     the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, 
     one of the few judges who strongly support the guidelines. 
     ``He is totally unflappable. He'll just say, `Awww, in a year 
     of two I think you'll change your mind.'''
       Congress, seeking to end sentencing disparities, created 
     the commission a decade ago. Before most people recognized 
     how great its power would be, Sen. Storm Thurmond (R-S.C.) 
     picked as chairman the little-known Wilkins, a former staffer 
     of his.
       Then a U.S. District judge in South Carolina, Wilkins 
     arrived for his fancy Washington job to find that he didn't 
     even have an office. He and the six other commissioners were 
     crammed into a single room in the Justice Department, two to 
     a desk, sharing just one telephone.
       Congress, not accounting for the magnitude of the job, had 
     given the commission 18 months to write a new punishment 
     system. That meant Wilkins had to make peace quickly between 
     six commissioners with clashing philosophies.
       Arguing away throughout 1986, they didn't even agree on 
     such basics as whether the goal of prison is punishment or 
     deterrence. One commissioner, fiercely opposed by other, 
     proposed a scheme so elaborate it would have required a judge 
     to tote up the ``harm units'' caused by a defendant and, in 
     some cases, calculate the square root of a square root to 
     figure out the sentence.
       ``Many times we all wanted to just say, `Really, is it all 
     worth it?''' admits Wilkins, who was appointed to the U.S. 
     Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in 1986. ``There were a 
     lot of tense moments, and people's tempers got hot, feelings 
     got hurt, but we had to overlook those things and keep moving 
     forward.''
       Wilkins pulled it off by keeping his demeanor as a Southern 
     gentleman. ``You could be a porter at a hotel or chief 
     justice of the United States, and his hand goes out and he 
     says, `Billwilkins,''' says longtime commission staffer Paul 
     Martin. ``It's incredibly disarming.''
       And it complements a bullheaded refusal to tolerate 
     obstacles. When one commissioner complained about the 
     arrangement of her office, Wilkins personally moved her couch 
     to the other side of the room. As the deadline for completing 
     the guidelines approached, Wilkins would stand by the copy 
     machine at 3:30 a.m., scrutinizing each page as it emerged.
       Few episodes reveal as much about Wilkins as his rejection 
     of intense pressure from the Reagan administration to include 
     the death penalty in the guidelines. Wilkins personally 
     supports capital punishment, but including it, he knew, could 
     cost the guidelines Democratic votes. Rather than risk this, 
     Wilkins broke a 3-3 commission tie to vote against the death 
     penalty.
       When the commission, to many people's surprise, succeeded 
     in actually producing a guideline system by April 1987, its 
     work had only begun. Facing a wave of hostility, the 
     commission was hit by 247 lawsuits by year's end.
       Judges' sentiments were captured in a 1987 speech by U.S. 
     District Judge G. Thomas Eisele of the Eastern District of 
     Arkansas, who fantasized about lawmakers admitting their 
     horrible error in creating the commission. ``And then they 
     would line up on the Capitol steps and say. `Mea culpa, mea 
     culpa, mea maxima culpa! We were wrong! Forgive us!,'' Eisele 
     said.
       Wilkins began traveling around the country, wading into 
     crowds of hostile judges to argue for the guidelines.
       The criticism was painful, he admits. ``When the pressure's 
     on and the clock's ticking and all you can hear is some judge 
     calling you up and saying, `You guys ought to quit and go 
     home, this is going to be terrible.' that call kind of 
     hurts.'' Wilkins says. But many judges, he adds, told him 
     privately they supported the guidelines.
       Others took issue with Wilkins' approach. Marc Miller, a 
     professor at Emory University School of law and the co-editor 
     of the Federal Sentencing Reporter, blames Wilkins for what 
     he sees as the Sentencing Commission's defensiveness.
       ``The closed nature of some of the commission's activities, 
     the private decisions in the midst of public meetings, the 
     hostility toward judges and others with concerns--that 
     reflects that a passion for success sometimes includes an 
     excessive defensiveness about critics,'' Miller says.
       But even those who fought Wilkins admire his achievement.
       ``I have nothing but praise for Billy Wilkins' tenure,'' 
     says Sam Buffone, a partner in the D.C. office of Boston's 
     Ropes & Gray and former chairman of the American Bar 
     Association's U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Committee. ``We 
     certainly came from opposite sides in terms of the issues. 
     But he was always fair, always willing to meet and talk. He 
     did and exceptional job, given a very difficult situation.''

                          ____________________