[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 14 (Tuesday, January 24, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S1474]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page S1474]]
                      MR. EDELMAN'S QUALIFICATIONS

 Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, I read George Will's column 
attacking Peter Edelman. It was a column written by someone who, 
obviously, has not had a chance to get acquainted with Peter Edelman. 
Knowing both George Will and Peter Edelman, my instinct is that if the 
two of them got acquainted, George Will would be one of his 
enthusiastic supporters, or at least a supporter.
  John Douglas, who headed the Civil Division of the Justice Department 
under Robert Kennedy, is the son of our former colleague Senator Paul 
Douglas. Paul Douglas was one of the finest people who ever served in 
the U.S. Senate, and John is cut from the same cloth.
  I believe my colleagues would be interested in his letter to the 
editor, which appeared in the Washington Post.
  I join in the sentiment it expresses.
  I've known Peter Edelman for a number of years, and I've always 
regarded him as a solid, substantial, well-balanced person, who would 
be a great judge.
  I ask to insert the John Douglas letter into the Record at this 
point.
  The letter follows:

                      Mr. Edelman's Qualifications

                          (By John W. Douglas)

       I write in response to George Will's attack on Peter 
     Edelman's qualifications to be a judge on the U.S. Court of 
     Appeals here, an attack centering on a law review article he 
     wrote some years ago on the 14th Amendment [op-ed, Dec. 18].
       I have known Mr. Edelman for more than 30 years and have 
     the highest opinion of his character and competence. He 
     worked as my special assistant in 1963 and 1964 when I was an 
     assistant attorney general in charge of the Justice 
     Department's Civil Division. He performed in outstanding 
     fashion in a variety of matters, including litigation for 
     which he was directly responsible, handling his work with 
     skill, excellent judgment and high standards.
       He has earned equally high marks for his subsequent work as 
     an assistant to Sen. Robert Kennedy, a vice president of the 
     University of Massachusetts and a law professor at 
     Georgetown. This long record of distinguished and principled 
     service commends him strongly for nomination to the federal 
     judiciary.
       Thus, it would be a shame if his critics' attacks on his 
     article's treatment of theoretical constitutional issues were 
     allowed to preclude his nomination. I am confident that at a 
     confirmation hearing Mr. Edelman would be able to convince 
     the committee that, if confirmed, he would faithfully follow 
     the law, as is required of all federal judges, and that he 
     fully understands that neither the due-process clause nor any 
     other constitutional provision guarantees subsistence, or any 
     level of subsistence, to its citizens; consequently, these 
     are matters for the political branches, particularly the 
     legislatures, to deal with and decide.
       In any event, this particular question should not be 
     decided in advance of a hearing and in a vacuum without 
     giving due weight to Mr. Edelman's impressive record.
     

                          ____________________