[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 165 (Monday, December 3, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12313-S12314]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. CRAIG:
  S. 1757. A bill to authorize an additional permanent judgeship in the 
district of Idaho, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation, on behalf 
of myself and my fellow Idaho Senator, Mike Crapo, creating a new 
Federal judgeship for the State of Idaho. This is a matter of great 
urgency to the citizens of Idaho, and our bill is aimed at heading off 
a looming crisis for the Federal bench in our State.
  Idaho has two Federal district judgeships, created in 1890 and 1954. 
It is one of only three States in the Union with two Federal District 
judgeships. Because of he State's sheer size, its extraordinary 
increase in population, and tremendous growth in caseload over nearly 
five decades, the current situation is becoming increasingly 
unworkable.
  For that reason, Senator Crapo and I are seeking an additional 
judgeship to ensure that there are adequate resources for the 
administration if justice in our State. I am gratified to note that we 
have the strong support of Idaho's sitting Federal judges in this 
effort.
  Let me take a moment to explain my State's problem in greater detail. 
Idaho has three distinct and widely distant geographical areas: the 
Southeast, the Southwest, and the North. A district judge must travel 
up to 450 miles between division offices. This distance is greater than 
that traveled in other rural district courts, including those Montana, 
Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, or eastern Washington. In fact, 
only a district judge in Alaska has a greater distance to travel, when 
comparing these rural district courts.
  The sheer size of Idaho, the geographical barriers, and the 
distribution of population make it a time-consuming, expensive and 
physically draining process for two judges to serve the entire State. 
As our current Chief District Judge B. Lynn Winmill has pointed out, if 
there is a trial in southwest Idaho and a trial in southeast Idaho, 
``there is no district judge to serve the needs of northern Idaho.'' In 
addition, as Judge Winmill has stated, the ``mountainous terrain and 
two-land highway system in northern Idaho make [that] area particularly 
difficult to serve.''
  Some Federal districts have the advantage of being able to call upon 
senior judges to help out by taking half-caseloads. Idaho has no senior 
judges and therefore does not have the flexibility that other districts 
have in relation to managing cases. Consequently, for example, when 
district Judge Edward J. Lodge was involved in a 6-month trial on a 
complex matter, Idaho was forced to request that the Ninth Circuit 
Judicial Council authorize the use of judges from the Eastern District 
of Washington. These judges assisted our district by handling close to 
50 cases in the last year. While this action may have eased Idaho's 
crisis temporarily, it cannot reasonably be considered an acceptable 
permanent solution to borrow judges from another state and district.
  The population of Idaho has increased 28.5 percent in the past 
decade, giving Idaho the third fastest-growing population in the 
country. In the past year alone, Idaho was the fifth fastest-growing 
State in the Nation. Population growth is traditionally a controlling 
factor in increasing a district's judgeships, and yet Idaho has not 
gained a judge in nearly half a century.
  The District of Idaho's caseload continues to grow. During the 12-
month period ending September 30, 2000, the District of Idaho's civil 
filings increased 26.9 percent, ranking second in the country in the 
percentage increase. Our district also ranks 25th in the Nation in the 
number of trials completed. The gap between the number of new civil 
filings and the number completed is spreading ever wider, and is 
already a broad chasm into which too many cases are already dropping.
  There are currently 23 assistant U.S. attorneys in Idaho, which is 
more than Montana, Wyoming, Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and 
eastern Washington. With filings for the period ending September 30, 
2000 weighted at 447 cases per judge, this number exceeds the 430 which 
the Judicial Conference uses to indicate the need for additional 
judgeships. Combining this excess number of cases with the travel 
distances in Idaho makes the caseload even more burdensome for Idaho's 
two judges.
  Additionally, according to Idaho's new U.S. Attorney Tom Moss, there 
has been an increase in criminal cases initiated, and he is expecting 
the ``caseloads to increase significantly,'' especially in Idaho's five 
Indian reservations.
  Although this bill is being introduced late in the year, the effort 
to secure an additional judgeship has been underway for many months. We 
have had member-to-member and staff-to-staff discussions with the 
Senate Judiciary Committee about including an additional judgeship for 
Idaho in any legislation that the committee considers, creating new 
judgeships. Indeed, Idaho's chief district judge even traveled to 
Washington, DC, to visit personally with members of the committee and 
make the case for a new Idaho district judgeship.
  I greatly appreciate the advice that we have received in this effort 
from Chairman Leahy, Senator Hatch, and their staff, as well as other 
Judiciary Committee members, and it is because they suggested it that 
we are taking the step of filing this very simple bill, to put the 
issue formally before the Judiciary Committee and the Senate.
  There should not be a waiting list for people to obtain justice in 
our courts, but there is in Idaho. This will continue to be the case 
until relief arrives

[[Page S12314]]

in the form of a third judge. I hope the Senate will support this 
measure and protect the interests of justice in the State of Idaho.
                                 ______