[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 154 (Thursday, November 8, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11590-S11592]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

    NOMINATION OF TERRY L. WOOTEN TO BE U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE 
                       DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to executive session to consider the nomination of Terry Wooten 
to be U.S. District Judge, that the Senate vote immediately on his 
confirmation, that the President be immediately notified of the 
Senate's action, and the Senate return to legislative session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I rise to express my strong support for 
the nomination of Terry Wooten to be a judge on the District Court for 
the District of South Carolina. I was pleased to recommend him to 
President Bush for this esteemed position.
  Just hours ago, Judge Wooten was favorably reported to the floor by 
the Judiciary Committee in an 19-0 vote. The Committee's unanimous vote 
and the Senate's speed in considering him today is a testament to his 
qualifications, character, and ability.
  Judge Wooten has spent almost all of his professional life in public 
service. He has served ably and diligently as a U.S. Magistrate Judge 
since 1999. Prior to that, he worked as a federal prosecutor for seven 
years. In the U.S. Attorney's office, he served as the lead Task Force 
attorney for major drug and violent crime prosecutions.
  Morever, he was the Republican chief counsel on the Judiciary 
Committee while I was Ranking Member, and did an exceptional job in 
that capacity.
  It is unfortunate that some allegations were raised during the 
committee's consideration of his nomination. However, once the 
investigation of this matter was complete, it was clear that there was 
no merit to them whatsoever.
  During the Judiciary executive business meeting earlier today, 
Chairman Leahy and Senator Biden, who was chairman of the committee at 
the time Judge Wooten was a staff member, both spoke favorably of his 
nomination. I appreciated their remarks. I was also very pleased that 
all members of the committee supported his candidacy.
  Judge Wooten is a man of honesty and integrity, and this process has 
simply reaffirmed that fact. I am confident that he will make an 
excellent addition to the District Court.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate my fellow 
South Carolinian, Terry Wooten, who will be confirmed today to the U.S. 
District Court for South Carolina.
  Terry Wooten graduated Phi Beta Kappa from the University of South 
Carolina in 1976 where he continued on to law school. Following law 
school, he worked in a private two-man firm that focused on criminal 
defense and personal injury cases. Two years later, he served as 
Assistant Solicitor for Richland County where he handled hundreds of 
cases including murders, criminal sexual conduct, robberies, drug 
offenses, burglaries, and many other local offenses for 4 years. As a 
result of his notable service as a local prosecutor, Senator Thurmond 
invited him to move to Washington and work as the chief counsel of the 
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee minority staff for 5 years. He then 
served with distinction as Assistant U.S. Attorney for South Carolina 
for 7 years. In this challenging position, he was assigned to the major 
drug and violent crime section. Judge Wooten excelled in this role and 
also served as the chief liaison between the relevant Federal agencies 
and the U.S. Attorney's office on drug and violent crime cases in the 
state. He is well known and respected by all local law enforcement 
agencies for his hard work with violent crime and drug offenders. In 
1999, this humble, yet very capable man was chosen to be a magistrate 
judge where he did a marvelous job.
  Terry Wooten comes to the U.S. District Court for the District of 
South Carolina judgeship with extensive experience as a State 
prosecutor in Richland County, as the Assistant U.S. Attorney, and as a 
Magistrate Judge. He was chosen for the position of Magistrate Judge by 
the judges of the Federal District Court for the District of South 
Carolina. I can think of no better testament to his character and 
qualifications and am pleased he will be joining their ranks. He will 
serve our judicial system well.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I congratulate the nominee and his family 
on his nomination and on what is soon to be his confirmation by the 
Senate and appointment by the President to the United States District 
Court for South Carolina. I thank all members of the Judiciary 
Committee for their attention to this nomination and thank the majority 
leader for his help in scheduling this vote.
  Since July 2001, when the Senate was allowed to reorganize and the 
committee membership was set, we have maintained a strong effort to 
consider judicial and executive nominees. With the confirmation of 
Judge Wooten, we reach additional milestones. Judge Wooten is the 17th 
judicial nominee we have confirmed since July. That is more total 
judges this year than were confirmed in 1989, the first year of the 
first Bush administration, and as many as were confirmed in all of the 
1996 session. Of course, in 1996, the Senate majority at that time did 
not proceed on a single nominee to a Court of Appeals and limited 
itself to confirming only 17 judges to the District Courts. We have 
this year already confirmed four nominees to the Courts of Appeals.
  Thus, despite all the upheavals we have experienced this year with 
the shifts in chairmanship and, more importantly, the need to focus our 
attention on responsible action in the fight against international 
terrorism, we have matched or beaten the number of confirmations of 
judges during the first year of first Bush administration and the last 
year of the first Clinton term.
  As a judge on the United States District Court, Judge Wooten will 
have a vital role to play in protecting and preserving our civil 
liberties in the days ahead. Our system of checks and balances requires 
that the judicial branch review the acts of the political branches.
  Judge Wooten served as the Republican Chief Counsel of the Judiciary 
Committee when he worked for Senator Thurmond. Senator Thurmond has 
been an advocate for this nominee from the beginning. Earlier today the 
Judiciary Committee considered the Wooten nomination and voted without 
objection to report it to the Senate. Our bipartisanship in these 
matters was amply demonstrated by our moving as soon as possible in the 
wake of a serious allegation of wrongdoing to consider and report a 
former Republican staff member for the respected senior Republican in 
the Senate.
  I held an expeditious hearing for Judge Wooten on August 27, during 
the

[[Page S11591]]

August recess of the Senate. On the morning of the hearing, we received 
serious allegations about him. These allegations raised questions about 
whether he had provided confidential materials to people outside the 
committee and the Senate with regard to the Clarence Thomas nomination. 
I asked Judge Wooten questions about the allegations and his actions, 
and he answered my questions.
  Senator Hatch and I agreed that the best course of action would be to 
ask the FBI to investigate this situation fully. We had been awaiting 
the results of that investigation until just recently. Once members of 
the Judiciary Committee had a chance to review the FBI materials and 
all other materials surrounding this nomination, we brought it to a 
vote.
  I believe that the allegations raised against Judge Wooten were 
serious and were worthy of inquiry. It appears to me from materials 
published in the aftermath of the confirmation battle that confidential 
committee materials were made available, contrary to our rules, to some 
outside the committee and the Senate. Having asked Judge Wooten about 
his involvement and having received his denials, I cannot say that 
there is a strong evidentiary basis on which to challenge his 
credibility or his denials with regard to his involvement in such 
matters.
  I have taken Judge Wooten at his word and voted to report his 
nomination. This afternoon I will vote in favor of this 
nomination. This week we held our ninth hearing on judicial nominations 
since I became chairman, when the Senate was allowed to reorganize and 
this committee was assigned its membership on July 10, 2001. We held 
our fifth hearing on judicial nominations since September 11. Overall 
we have held hearings on 28 judicial nominees, including seven to the 
Courts of Appeals. Since September 11 we have held hearings on 21 
judicial nominees, including four to the Courts of Appeals.

  Within 2 days of the terrible events of September 11, I chaired a 
confirmation hearing for the two judicial nominees who drove to 
Washington while interstate air travel was still disrupted. Then on 
October 4, 2001 we held another confirmation hearing for five judicial 
nominees, which included a nominee from Nebraska who was unable to 
attend the earlier hearing because of the disruption in air travel.
  On October 18, 2001, in spite of the closure of Senate office 
buildings in the wake of the receipt of a letter containing anthrax 
spores and Senate staff and employees were testing positive for anthrax 
exposure, the committee proceeded under extraordinary circumstances in 
the U.S. Capitol to hold a hearing for five more judicial nominees. The 
building housing the Judiciary Committee hearing room was closed, as 
were the buildings housing the offices of all the Senators on the 
committee. Still we persevered.
  Two weeks ago, while the Senate Republicans were shutting down the 
Senate with a filibuster preventing action on the bill that funds our 
Nation's foreign policy initiatives and provides funds to help build 
the international coalition against terrorism, the Judiciary Committee 
nonetheless proceeded with yet another hearing for four more judicial 
nominees on October 25, 2001.
  Yesterday we convened the fifth hearing for judicial nominees within 
eight extraordinary weeks--weeks not only interrupted by holidays, but 
by the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, the receipt 
of anthrax in the Senate, and the closure of Senate office buildings. 
Yesterday's hearing was delayed by another unfortunate and unforseen 
event when one of the family members of one of the nominees grew faint 
and required medical attention. With patience and perseverance, the 
hearing was completed after attending to those medical needs.
  In addition, during the time during which we held five hearings on 
judicial nominees, we devoted our attention and efforts to expedited 
consideration of anti-terrorism legislation. Far from taking a ``time 
out'' as some have suggested, this committee has been in overdrive 
since July and we redoubled our efforts after September 11, 2001.
  With respect to law enforcement, I have noted that the Administration 
was quite slow in making U.S. Attorney nominations, although it had 
called for the resignations of U.S. Attorneys early in the year. Since 
we began receiving nominations just before the August recess, we have 
been able to report and the Senate has confirmed approximately 50 of 
these nominations. We have a few more with incomplete paperwork and we 
await approximately 35 nominations from the administration. These are 
the President's nominees based on the standards that he and the 
Attorney General have devised. I have asked for the standards and 
criteria they are using, but, as far as I am aware, have not received 
the courtesy of a reply.
  I note, again, that it is most unfortunate that we still have not 
received even a single nomination for any of the U.S. Marshal 
positions. U.S. Marshals are often the top Federal law enforcement 
officer in their district. They are an important frontline component in 
homeland security efforts across the country. It now appears that we 
will end the year without a single nomination for these 94 critical law 
enforcement positions.
  In the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11, many of us have 
been disdaining partisanship to join together in a bipartisan effort in 
the best interests of the country. There were reports within 10 days of 
September 11 that some Republicans were disappointed because they would 
not be able to filibuster appropriations bills and contend that the 
Senate was treating Bush judicial nominees as badly as they had treated 
the Clinton nominees. Their initial disappointment apparently 
dissipated within days because they did initiate a 3-week filibuster of 
the foreign operations appropriations bill. That is the bill that 
contains funding for our international antiterrorism coalition building 
activities as well as other essential military and humanitarian 
programs. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed and that filibuster 
ultimately faded.
  There have been other press accounts that some Republican operatives 
are trying to engage the White House and, even more unfortunately, the 
Department of Justice in a partisan effort to try to take political 
advantage of the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Were those 
efforts to go forward, that would be disappointing. The bipartisan 
effort against terrorism is not something that Republicans should try 
to manipulate in such a way. Had the Senate moved more efficiently on 
nominations over the last 6 or 7 years, we would not have had so many 
vacancies perpetuated under their previous Senate majority. And 
finally, as the facts establish and as our actions today again 
demonstrate, we are moving ahead to fill judicial vacancies with 
nominees who have strong bipartisan support. These include a number of 
very conservative nominees. We have proceeded on nominees with mixed 
ABA peer reviews, including an Arizona nominee who was included in the 
hearing just yesterday. As I have noted, we have already confirmed more 
District Court judges since July of this year than were confirmed in 
the entire first year of the first Bush administration. Had the 
administration not changed the confirmation process from the precedents 
that had served us for more than 50 years, we might have been able to 
confirm a few more.
  The President has yet even to nominate to 46 District Court 
vacancies. I hope that he will work with the Senate to make sure those 
nominations will be consensus nominees and that they can be considered 
promptly. Because the White House was slow to name District Court 
nominees this year, the bulk of those who have not had hearings do not 
even have ABA peer review ratings. When this administration 
unilaterally changed the process from that followed by all prior 
Presidents beginning with Eisenhower, it backloaded the process. There 
are still nine nominees, received since September 10, who do not have 
ABA peer reviews.
  Several others have received mixed reviews that require additional 
time and study. I have noted that at our most recent hearing we 
included a District Court nominee from Arizona with a review that 
includes a minority of the peer review declaring the candidate ``not 
qualified'' to be a District Court judge. In addition, there are at 
least two more with those mixed ratings and at least one District Court 
nominee with a ``not qualified'' rating. Those ratings caution against 
rushing people through the confirmation process.
  With this confirmation today, the Senate will have confirmed another

[[Page S11592]]

five District Court judges just this week. We held a hearing for five 
more District Court nominees yesterday. We have an additional three 
District Court nominees who could be considered as soon as they finish 
their paperwork and answer questions about their criminal histories.
  Thus, having confirmed 13 District Court judges in record time, we 
could confirm an additional eight with cooperation from the White 
House, nominees and our Republican colleagues.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination.
  The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Terry L. 
Wooten, of South Carolina, to be U.S. District Judge for the District 
of South Carolina.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination 
of Terry L. Wooten, of South Carolina, to be United States District 
Judge for the District of South Carolina? On this question, the yeas 
and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Cleland) and 
the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Miller) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 98, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 333 Ex.]

                                YEAS--98

     Akaka
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Cantwell
     Carnahan
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Cleland
     Miller
       
  The nomination was confirmed.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and I move to 
lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

                          ____________________