[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 86 (Wednesday, June 10, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6397-S6398]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     NOMINATION OF HILLARY TOMPKINS

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today, as I did on 
June 2, to urge quick action on the nomination of Hillary Tompkins to 
be the Solicitor in the Department of the Interior. That is an 
important job in this country and in the Department of the Interior, 
and the President has chosen well in choosing Miss Tompkins to be the 
Solicitor. She has broad experience in natural resource issues. She is 
extremely well qualified in all respects. She was chief counsel to the 
Governor of New Mexico, Governor Richardson, until recently, where she 
demonstrated her ability to lead a team of lawyers in that position and 
to provide sound legal counsel. So it is unclear to me why anyone would 
be objecting to her being approved as our Solicitor.
  When I came to the floor on June 2, about 8 days ago, and talked 
about this subject, I asked unanimous consent that we proceed to 
executive session, that her nomination be confirmed, and that we advise 
the President of our action and the Senate go back to other business. 
Senator McConnell, on behalf of the Republican Members in the Senate, 
objected and said that--I think his specific response was they were 
still working on this. Let me quote him. He said:

       We have not been able to get that nomination cleared yet on 
     this side, but we will be consulting with the Republican 
     colleagues, and at some point let him know whether it is 
     possible to go forward.

  I assume the word ``him'' in that quote refers to me. At any rate, he 
objected. That was disappointing. But I am even more disappointed to 
announce or to call attention to the fact that we still are not able to 
clear Miss Tompkins for this important position. I think it is unfair 
to her, I think it is unfair to our former colleague, now Secretary of 
the Interior Salazar, who needs a capable person in this position. We 
should not be standing in the way of that occurring. I think his 
ability to serve the people of the country will be improved by having a 
good solicitor in that office and we should get on with the job of 
confirming that nomination.
  At the time I was urging action on her nomination before, I was 
advised that there were two Senators who had objections. Senator Coburn 
had put a hold on the nominee because of concerns of one kind or 
another--I don't know the specifics--and I believe Senator Bunning had 
concerns as well. I have now been advised that both of

[[Page S6398]]

those Senators have withdrawn their holds and are now satisfied.
  Senator Bunning had written a letter to Secretary Salazar raising 
concerns about coal mining and mountaintop-removal-related issues. 
Secretary Salazar responded to that letter on June 4. As I understand 
it, Senator Coburn also wrote. His letter was to Miss Tompkins, raising 
questions about whether she was in fact committed to enforcing the law 
when she was the Solicitor. She wrote him back and said she is clearly 
committed to enforcing the law, which of course would be part of her 
oath of office.
  Based on those exchanges of letters, I am informed that both Senator 
Bunning and Senator Coburn are satisfied that her nomination can go 
forward at this time.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record 
the correspondence between those two Senators and Secretary Salazar and 
the nominee Hillary Tompkins, following my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See exhibit 1.)
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Those concerns have been resolved. I am not clear as to 
what the continued problem is, why we cannot get this nomination 
cleared. I raise it at this point. I put people on notice, or the 
Senate on notice, if we are not able to get it cleared I will once 
again come to the floor and ask unanimous consent later this week for 
us to proceed to executive session and to confirm that nomination.
  I think this is a highly irregular process to just hold someone 
hostage for some totally unrelated concern which she has no ability to 
control. If there were some problem with this nominee, if there were 
some objection to her qualifications, clearly that would be a different 
matter. But as far as I know there is no objection to her 
qualifications. There is no problem with this nominee or any statements 
she has made or any action she has taken. On that ground, I think we 
need to move quickly to confirm her nomination. I hope my colleagues 
will agree and will allow that to happen later today.
  I yield the floor.

                               Exhibit 1


                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                     Washington, DC, June 3, 2009.
     Hilary Tompkins,
     Department of the Interior,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Ms. Tompkins, As you know, on May 22, 2009, President 
     Obama signed into law the Protecting Americans from Violent 
     Crime Act. This act was overwhelmingly approved in a 
     bipartisan fashion in both the Senate and the House of 
     Representatives as an amendment to the Credit Card 
     Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009, and 
     will take effect in February, 2010.
       The act states, ``The Secretary of the Interior shall not 
     promulgate or enforce any regulation that prohibits an 
     individual from possessing a firearm including an assembled 
     or functional firearm in any unit of the National Park System 
     or the National Wildlife Refuge System if--
       (1) the individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from 
     possessing the firearm; and
       (2) the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the 
     law of the State in which the unit of the National Park 
     System or the National Wildlife Refuge System is located.''
       Forty-eight states protect the rights of their residents to 
     carry a concealed weapon. Properly implemented, the 
     Protecting Americans from Violent Crime Act should, for the 
     first time, also protect the individual's right to carry and 
     possess firearms in all national parks and wildlife refuges, 
     in accordance with state and federal law.
       As Solicitor of the Department of the Interior, will you 
     commit to ensuring the law is implemented in a way that 
     robustly protects the rights of law-abiding gun owners, as 
     Congress clearly intended? Will you also commit to vigorously 
     defend this law against hostile litigation?
       Thank you for your desire to serve our great country. I 
     look forward to receiving your response by Friday, June 5, 
     2009.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Tom Coburn,
     U.S. Senator.
                                  ____

                                                     June 5, 2009.
     Hon. Tom Coburn, M.D.
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Coburn: Thank you for your letter of June 3, 
     2009, containing questions to me that relate to the 
     Protecting Americans from Violent Crime Act, which was 
     included in Public Law 111-24 and will take effect in 
     February 2010.
       Following the enactment of Public Law 111-24, the Secretary 
     announced that the Department would follow Congress's 
     directive and implement the new law when it takes effect. If 
     confirmed as Solicitor, I will be duty-bound to uphold and 
     defend the Constitution and laws of the United States, 
     including this particular law.
       With regard to defending this law against legal challenges, 
     the Attorney General of the United States is charged by 
     statute with representing the United States in all legal 
     matters. If confirmed, I will commit to working closely with 
     the Department of Justice in connection with any defense of 
     this Act and all other federal laws.
           Sincerely,
     Hilary C. Tompkins.
                                  ____



                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                     Washington, DC, June 4, 2009.
     Mr. Ken Salazar,
     Secretary, Department Of Interior,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Salazar: I am writing to express my continued 
     concern about the Department of Interior's decision to 
     reverse its stream buffer zone policy and ask the Department 
     of Justice to file a plea with the U.S. District Court 
     requesting that the current rule be vacated. Coal mining is a 
     top energy issue to the Commonwealth of Kentucky and 
     consequently I have an extreme interest in the stream buffer 
     zone rule.
       Aside from striking a balance between environmental 
     protections, the now abandoned rule clarified a long standing 
     dispute over how the Surface Mining law should be applied. 
     Issuance of the rule represented the culmination of a seven 
     year process that was thorough and well vetted. While I 
     appreciate the comments that you and other members of the 
     Department of the Interior have made regarding the importance 
     of the role of our coal mining communities in our national 
     energy landscape, I also believe that nearly a decade of 
     examination of this issue should not be overturned lightly.
       I respectfully ask for your full commitment to work with me 
     as DOI determines how it will resolve the stream buffer zone 
     matter. I further ask for a prompt written reply to this 
     request. I appreciate your consideration and look forward to 
     hearing from you. Please feel free to contact Sarah Timoney, 
     of my staff, at 202-224-4343 should you have any questions.
           Best personal regards,
                                                      Jim Bunning,
     United States Senator.
                                  ____



                                The Secretary of the Interior,

                                         Washington, June 4, 2009.
     Hon. Jim Bunning,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bunning: Thank you for your letter dated June 
     4, 2009. regarding the lawsuit surrounding the Office of 
     Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement's Stream Buffer 
     Zone regulation.
       The matter is currently in litigation. We have asked the 
     Court to take action that will allow the 1983 Reagan 
     Administration rule to continue in force in all of the states 
     that have delegated authority under the Surface Mining 
     Control and Reclamation Act. Kentucky. along with most 
     states, currently follows the 1983 rule.
       I will ensure that there is an opportunity for public input 
     on the potential development of a comprehensive new stream 
     buffer zone rule that would update and clarify the 1983 rule. 
     We will keep you informed of our progress in this matter and 
     welcome your suggestions.
       As I have said many times, we must responsibly develop 
     cOnventional energy sources, including coal. in order to 
     achieve greater energy independence. I look forward to 
     working together to achieve these goals.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Ken Salazar.

  Mr. BINGAMAN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________