[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 25 (Friday, March 8, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Page S1697]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    NOMINATION OF CHARLES PICKERING

  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. Madam President, I rise to discuss the 
nomination of Charles Pickering. Senator Specter just spoke on it.
  This is a tragedy, when we have to drag people through the mud when 
they get finally to the hearing process, as Charles Pickering has. He 
is a man whose name is being dragged through the mud, even though 
people in his hometown of all races and creeds are praising him and 
saying: Whatever mistakes he made in the past, we understand. He has 
moved beyond that. He is a good man. He ought to be on the bench. Yet 
here we are, stuck with probably seeing a situation where Charles 
Pickering will be defeated by one vote on a party-line vote and not be 
allowed to come to the floor.
  Why not give the Senate a chance? It is done. Maybe it has not been 
done that often on circuit court matters, but it has certainly been 
done many times with Supreme Court Judges. I hate to say it because I 
will not get into the partisan rhetoric here, but this is a classic 
case of getting ``Borked'' again. We all know what Judge Bork went 
through, and Clarence Thomas. We know what John Ashcroft went through.
  Is this the way to treat people? Just be fair about it. If we are 
going to hold people accountable for every single mistake they make in 
life, then we will have to have perfect people. I don't know too many 
perfect people walking around this Chamber. If there is anybody in this 
Chamber who has not made any mistakes, they probably should vote 
against Pickering.
  This is ridiculous. He is a good man, a good judge. To have his name 
dragged through the mud is disgusting. I hate to see it. It reminds me 
of the Ashcroft hearing, of the terrible things said about Clarence 
Thomas and, of course, Robert Bork. Bork was probably one of the most 
qualified people ever to even be nominated for the Supreme Court. 
Whether you liked him or disliked him on his views, he was still 
qualified. The last time I looked, a President had the right to pick 
somebody of his choosing, of his philosophy.
  I voted for I don't know how many Clinton nominations to the Supreme 
Court, to the Federal court system. I didn't expect to get Reagan-type 
judges out of Bill Clinton, but he was the President. I supported most 
of them unless there was some particular thing that, in my view, made 
them not qualified.
  To echo what Senator Specter said, it is my hope we will move this 
nomination to the Senate floor and let the Senate make the decision. 
That is not unreasonable. The committee is deadlocked on a partisan 
vote. Bring Judge Pickering out. If he loses, fine; if he wins, fine. 
But let him have a vote. He deserves that. At worst, we can say maybe 
some of the things are true. How do you know whether what he said and 
did 30 or 40 years ago is over now? Can you be the judge of that? Let 
all 100 Senators make that judgment. I would like to have a chance to 
have a vote on that.

                          ____________________