[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 106 (Friday, July 29, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9420-S9421]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


             HEARINGS ON SUPREME COURT NOMINEE JOHN ROBERTS

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to outline the 
scheduling procedures for the confirmation hearings on Judge John 
Roberts to the Supreme Court of the United States. I will be followed 
by my colleague, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, who 
will state a joint agreement, which is incorporated in my statement. 
Senator Leahy will deal with the joint agreement.
  The decision on when to start the confirmation hearings on Judge 
Roberts depends on what beginning day--whether August 29 or September 
6--is most likely to lead to a vote no later than September 29, so 
that, if confirmed, the nominee can be seated when the Supreme Court 
begins its term on October 3. I have stated my own preference for 
September 6 early on, but I emphasized that I was flexible and would be 
willing to start on August 29.
  Our duty to have the nominee in place by October 3 took precedence on 
my or anyone else's preferences.
  In light of the many possibilities for delay, some justified and some 
tactical, it seemed to me the safer course was the earlier date. At the 
same time, I was and am mindful that the Senate and the Judiciary 
Committee can accomplish more in 3 cooperative hours than 3 days or 
perhaps even 3 weeks of disharmonious activity. If any disgruntled 
Senator wants to throw a monkey wrench into the proceedings, even with 
the August 29 starting date, there would be no absolute assurance of 
meeting the October 3 target.
  I acknowledge at the outset that it was unrealistic to obtain a 
binding unanimous consent agreement specifying an exact timetable with 
a commitment to vote by September 29. There are too many legitimate 
issues which could arise which would justify delays where Senators 
would be compromising their rights by such an agreement. Senator Leahy 
and I have had numerous discussions over the past week with his 
objective to start the hearings on September 6 and my objective to 
obtain assurances, if not commitments, that the Senate would vote by 
September 29.
  Our discussions at various times included Senator Frist, Senator 
Reid, and Senator McConnell. We have had many additional discussions in 
the last 72 hours, too numerous to mention. But in one meeting on 
Thursday among the five of us--Senator Frist, Senator Reid, Senator 
McConnell, Senator Leahy, and myself--we came to an agreement.
  No. 1, the hearings would start on September 6.
  No. 2, Senators would waive their right to hold over the nomination 
for 1 week when first on the Judiciary Committee executive agenda, so 
the committee vote could occur any time after September 12 and, as 
chairman, I intend to exercise my prerogative to set the committee vote 
on our Judiciary Committee agenda for September 15.
  No. 3, Democrats and Republicans would waive their right to terminate 
committee hearings which went past 2 hours after the Senate came into 
session.
  No. 4, all written questions would have to be submitted by September 
12, with answers to be submitted in a timely fashion.
  No. 5 Senators from both parties would waive their right to submit 
dissenting or additional or minority views to the committee report.
  Beyond these enumerated agreements, the principal basis for the 
Republicans' willingness to begin the hearing on September 6 was the 
emphasis by Senator Reid and Senator Leahy of their good faith in 
moving the nomination process promptly to meet the October 3 date.
  All factors considered, it was our judgment that the September 6 
starting date was the best alternative for concluding the hearings in 
time to seat Judge Roberts, if confirmed, on October 3.
  I now yield to my distinguished colleague, the ranking member, the 
Senator from Vermont.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont is recognized.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairman. He and 
I have spent, I believe, more time with each other than we have with 
our families in the past couple weeks. I am not sure if that is to the 
detriment of our families or ourselves or to the benefit of our 
families or ourselves. In any event, it is a fact we spent an enormous 
amount of time.
  As the distinguished chairman has talked about--and I will in a 
moment submit this as a joint statement from the two of us--we have 
agreed to the following:
  The hearings will start on Tuesday, September 6. The Judiciary 
Committee members will waive their right to hold over the nomination 
for 1 week, when first placed on the Judiciary Committee executive 
agenda. The vote, of course, then could occur any time after Monday, 
September 12. The chairman intends to set that vote on the executive 
agenda on Thursday, September 15.
  Senators--and this will require all 100 Senators--will waive their 
right to invoke the 2-hour rule to terminate Judiciary Committee 
hearings 2 hours after the Senate comes into session during the time of 
the nomination hearings on Judge Roberts.
  All written questions will be submitted within 24 hours of the 
conclusion of the hearing, and answers will be provided in a timely 
fashion.
  And we recognize that nothing in the Senate or Judiciary Committee 
rules precludes the Senate from considering the nomination on the floor 
without a committee report.
  As we know--and I see two of the distinguished leaders of the Senate 
on the floor and others will be joining us--I served several times in 
the majority, several times in the minority, and I have handled many 
bills on the floor--you can work out every single possible contingency, 
but there is always something that comes up, and that is why we have 
chairmen and ranking members.

  I have a great deal of respect for Senator Specter. He has always 
been straightforward with me. He has always kept his word to me, as I 
have to him. We think we have covered all the contingencies. Anything 
can happen. I suspect the two of us can handle that.
  I think of some of the contingencies in the last few years. I 
remember an important hearing scheduled and we had the disaster of 
September 11. Obviously, nobody plans or hopes for such events. We have 
the ability to work out those kinds of situations.
  Long before the Supreme Court vacancy, long before this nomination, 
the chairman and I worked cooperatively to lay the groundwork for full 
hearings to prepare that committee for when that day will arrive. We 
have now announced the schedule for the hearings to begin. I know we 
will continue to work with each other in good faith as the process 
unfolds, but when we look at this beginning the first week the Senate 
returns to session after Labor Day, it is a brisk schedule. To meet the 
schedule, we need the cooperation of the administration.
  The Senate only today, Friday, received the President's official 
nomination of Judge Roberts. The Senate has not received basic 
background information on the nominee in answer to the Judiciary 
Committee's questionnaire. The Senate only today received updated 
background check materials from the FBI. All of these, of course, we 
need.
  In advance of receiving the nomination, Chairman Specter and I joined 
together earlier this week in setting forth additional requests for the 
information through the Judiciary Committee questionnaire, something 
worked out by the two of us.
  The Democratic members of the committee sent the White House a letter 
on Tuesday, with a priority of the documents for the nominee's years of 
work in the Reagan White House with White House counsel Fred Fielding 
from among the documents the administration had indicated it was making 
arrangements to provide to the Senate.
  Yesterday I shared with the chairman a suggested request for 
materials in connection with only 16 priority cases from the hundreds 
considered during the years during which the nominee was Kenneth 
Starr's political deputy at the Department of Justice. That request has 
also been expedited and sent to the administration this week, even 
before the President sent the nomination to the Senate.
  The President said he hopes the new Justice can be confirmed by the 
start of the Court's next session on the first

[[Page S9421]]

Monday in October. The Senate has already cooperated in achieving this 
goal. At this point, there is no reason to believe the goal cannot be 
met, but we need the full cooperation of the administration. The 
administration has weighed in heavily with demands regarding the 
Senate's schedule.
  What we need more than the White House telling us how and when to do 
our job is a White House willing to help us expedite our consideration 
by making relevant materials available without delay so we can meet the 
chairman's aggressive schedule.
  The President has extolled the nominee's credentials, including his 
years of work in three senior executive branch posts during the 
Presidencies of his father and President Reagan.
  We are seeking a very small number of the documents evidencing his 
work in those policy positions. In order for us to fulfill our 
responsibilities to examine this nomination and report it to the 
Senate, the Senate Judiciary Committee should be provided these 
materials without delay so we can perform our due diligence.
  The White House this week said the Senate will have wide access to 
the documents from the Reagan administration, but only after an 
elaborate screening process. Based on the White House's own statement 
about the length of time it will take to screen these documents, that 
will be 4 weeks from now, maybe even longer.
  The date the chairman is setting for the beginning of the hearings 
emphasizes the ability to review the materials before the hearings 
requires quicker action from the administration than that. One only 
need glance at the calendar to see 4 weeks from today is only a few 
days before the hearings, and that includes Labor Day weekend.
  This is a nominee who, if confirmed, could be serving on the Supreme 
Court until 2030 or beyond, well past the term of the President who 
appointed him and well past the terms or even the lifetimes of Members 
of the Senate who may make this decision. This is a decision that not 
only affects every American alive today but also our children and 
grandchildren.
  The Constitution gives the Senate, and only the Senate, the 
responsibility of considering a President's nominations to a lifetime 
appointment to the Supreme Court.
  The Constitution gives us the duty to make this decision as well as 
we can, not as fast as we can.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I express my appreciation to the two 
managers of the Judiciary Committee, the chairman and ranking member. I 
understand why there is a little distrust on both sides because of all 
the stuff we have gone through on judges. They have done good work, and 
there is no reason that anyone should be concerned about the work of 
the Judiciary Committee.
  The waivers that have been made by the Senators as to the 1-week 
layover and 2-hour meeting time for the committee to meet is something 
to show we are trying to move forward on this in good faith.
  I have no doubt, with the work of these two men, that we will be able 
to work our way through any hurdles we have. We all know the date the 
distinguished Senator from Pennsylvania, the chairman of the committee, 
is shooting for is to make sure Judge Roberts is seated by October 3. 
We want to make sure that everyone understands that there are no games 
being played. Nobody is trying to do anything untoward. We are going to 
do our very best to work toward that date.
  The entire Democratic caucus has the utmost faith in our leader, 
Senator Leahy. The Judiciary Committee has been, for 7 months, his. He 
has done extremely good work, as he has always done. I have been on 
this floor many times when I served in different capacities where I 
would talk about the Senator from Vermont in the most positive terms.
  I feel the same way about the Senator from Pennsylvania. The Senate 
is fortunate to have the Senator from Pennsylvania leading the Senate 
in this most complicated, difficult committee, with the most vexatious 
issues, it seems, all the times.
  I have spent quite a bit of time, in the last few days, with them and 
the majority leader and Senator McConnell. It has been worthwhile. This 
is going to move forward.
  As the Senator from Vermont has stated, materials are needed. We 
understand the power of a committee chairman in this instance. He has 
tremendous power. We don't take anything away from the power he has. He 
can set the markup whenever he wants, within reason. He can call for 
votes when he wants. But he has, in the past, been very fair, and he 
will continue to be. I have no doubt that is the case.
  I also want the record to reflect that I did not get the floor before 
the majority leader; he was not here. That is why I grabbed the floor 
before someone else did. I certainly would not try to speak before the 
majority leader. Protocol would say that isn't the case. The majority 
leader was not here, and I did not want somebody else to grab the 
floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, we have a bit of business to do before we 
close down tonight. What we heard from our colleagues reflects the 
cooperative spirit that is very important as we fulfill our 
constitutional responsibility in terms of this very important 
nomination.
  As our colleagues can tell, there have been a lot of discussions with 
the chairman and ranking member and the leadership on both sides of the 
aisle. What we witnessed is the decision to begin hearings after Labor 
Day, that the hearings and the subsequent action, including the workup 
to the floor, which according to the schedule that has been laid out, 
implies to me we would be able to be on the floor by September 26, and 
with that would be able to have the nomination finished by the end of 
that week, confirmed, and the Justice would be sitting on that first 
Monday in October.
  I do wish to thank all of the people who have been mentioned for 
bringing us to this point and expect that over August, with civility, 
we will be able to continue our study of records and background that 
are provided. We will have a very busy early September as those 
hearings begin.
  In terms of timing, it looks as if we will be able to achieve the 
objectives from both sides of the aisle. We very much appreciate that 
leadership in a bipartisan way in the chairman and ranking member.
  Mr. REID. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I commend the chairman and the ranking 
member of the Judiciary Committee. These are difficult things to do, 
and I am glad to see that type of cooperation in what really is a very 
important set of hearings with regard to the Supreme Court of the 
United States of America. Above all, I want to see Judge Roberts 
treated fairly. I believe we are off to a good start, and hopefully 
that will continue.

                          ____________________