[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 20, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13-S18]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXECUTIVE SESSION
______
NOMINATION OF BEVERLY BALDWIN MARTIN TO BE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
proceed to executive session to report the following nomination.
The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Beverly
Baldwin Martin, of Georgia, to be United States Circuit Judge for the
Eleventh Circuit.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 60
minutes of debate equally divided and controlled between the Senator
from Vermont, Mr. Leahy, and the Senator from Alabama, Mr. Sessions.
Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak under
[[Page S14]]
the time allotted to Senator Sessions and that I be followed by my
colleague Senator Isakson.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Georgia is recognized.
Mr. CHAMBLISS. I rise today to speak on behalf of a good friend, a
very fine jurist, Judge Beverly Martin, who has been nominated by
President Obama to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
I have had the good fortune of knowing Judge Martin, who is a native
of Macon, GA, for many years and could think of no one with more
integrity, professional competence, and appropriate judicial bearing to
sit on the Nation's second highest bench.
Judge Martin is a fourth-generation lawyer. Her great-grandfather,
grandfather, and her father were all lawyers in Macon, GA. They started
the law firm of Martin & Snow in Macon, which is where Judge Martin
also began the practice of law after graduating from the University of
Georgia School of Law in 1981.
I talked to my good friend Cubbege Snow, Jr., who was one of the
senior partners at the firm at that point in time. I said: Cubbege,
tell me about Beverly. What did you do with her when she came fresh out
of law school to be the fourth generation Martin in that law firm?
He said: Saxby, she started just like everybody else; we put her
collecting accounts, which is the one thing lawyers have to do when
they start out is that sort of menial type work.
I remember one day walking by her office and she is obviously on the
phone with somebody trying to collect an open account, and she finally
screamed at whoever it was on the other end and said, ``If you do not
pay this bill, I am going to lose my job.''
So Beverly Martin started at the bottom of the ladder in the practice
of law. She has worked herself up to the point now of being one of the
finest district court judges we have in our State.
My good friend Jerry Harrell, who is also a member of that firm, says
the thing he remembered best about now Judge Martin when she was
practicing law is that she is very bright, but she approached
everything from a true commonsense standpoint and that she was a very
level-headed individual.
Judge Martin was drawn from private practice to Atlanta to go to work
in the attorney general's office by then Attorney General Mike Bowers.
She was there for a 10-year period. And in 1997 she was appointed U.S.
Attorney for the Middle District of Georgia after serving for a couple
of years as an assistant U.S. attorney.
During her tenure as U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Georgia
in Macon, Judge Martin was known as a tough prosecutor. She handled
cases herself in a way that was not only very professional but in a
very meaningful way.
At the same time, she was very compassionate outside of the
courtroom. In fact, she started a program in Macon, Valdosta, Columbus,
and Athens that is called the Weed & Seed Program. It is now a
nationwide program that is run through U.S. Attorney offices. Judge
Martin was a strong proponent and received national recognition for the
work she did with the Weed & Seed Program in our State. She also held
day camps for inner-city kids during the summertime. She served on
various boards, including the board of Macon State College and Majority
Women of Achievement, which board she serves on with my wife Julianne.
Her lengthy tenure as a prosecutor has given her a uniquely informed
perspective. When handling criminal cases, as many of my colleagues
know, a prosecutor must be tough but fair in carrying out their
responsibilities. This experience has served her well as she has served
on the District Court. It makes her exceptionally well qualified to
serve on the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
While on the district court, Judge Martin was faced with several
difficult criminal matters. In 2002, she refused to intervene and halt
the scheduled execution of a man convicted of killing a Columbus, GA,
police officer.
More recently, in 2008, she rejected arguments that Georgia's method
of capital punishment was unconstitutional, determining that it more
than conformed with the recent Supreme Court guidance on the issue.
In his choice of Judge Martin, the President not only picked a fine
Georgian to sit on the nation's second highest bench, but he has also
picked a topnotch legal mind.
More revealing about Judge Martin as a jurist than my remarks are the
anonymous lawyer comments that have been written about her during her 9
years on the bench. Words such as ``smart,'' ``bright,''
``respectful,'' and ``fair'' appear frequently. One lawyer wrote, ``Her
legal ability is matched by her courtroom demeanor, which is the best
around.''
Another said, ``She always calls it as she sees it. She has no
leaning.''
Mike Bowers, attorney general and her mentor of 15 years, said she is
the most evenhanded judge he has ever appeared before.
In fact, Mike, who is now in private practice, told me that he tried
the very first jury trial case before Judge Martin. In Federal trials,
the lawyers are all required to stand at a lecturn where they ask their
questions to the witnesses, and it is not appropriate to get too close
to the jury. But all of us used to try to do that because you could
sometimes be more effective. He said: One day I was trying this case
before Judge Martin, the very first case she had tried, and I obviously
got a little too close to the jury. Being the evenhanded judge she is,
she looked at her 15-year mentor and she said, very professionally: Mr.
Bowers, please back away a respectful distance from the jury. He said:
I remember it very well.
That is the evenhandedness with which Judge Martin has always
conducted herself on the bench. I have no doubt Judge Martin will serve
the people of Georgia, Alabama, and Florida very well on the Eleventh
Circuit. She is, to put it plainly, a fair and wise judge. The
President couldn't have chosen a more qualified individual for the
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. I am proud to lend my support to her
and look forward to her swift confirmation.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague Senator
Chambliss to endorse the confirmation and hopefully unanimous
confirmation of Judge Beverly Martin to the Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals. I thank President Obama for sending this nomination forward
and for the consultation his people had with Senator Chambliss and
myself. I thank Senator Leahy, chairman, and Ranking Member Sessions
from Alabama of the Judiciary Committee for the diligence with which
they approached this confirmation and the speed with which we have now
brought it to the floor.
I am proud that the vote on Judge Martin today will be the first vote
of the 2010 session of the Senate. As Senator Chambliss said, Judge
Martin comes from a long, distinguished family of lawyers from middle
Georgia. She comes to the bench with a balanced temperament and the
evenhanded process that comes from growing up in middle Georgia and
having respect for one's fellow man.
I don't know Judge Martin and did not know Judge Martin until she was
nominated. I am not an attorney so I didn't have a lot to fall back on
when I made my first judgment. I decided what I would do is what I
always did in my 33 years of business. I figured you could always find
out what was at the heart of someone by calling those who competed with
them, other members of the same profession. So I called lawyers,
judges, prosecutors around Georgia, friends I had, and said: Tell me
what you know about Judge Beverly Martin. Without exception, every
response was positive.
It was interesting. One district attorney said: I like her because
she has the tenacity of a prosecutor. She was a prosecutor for the
northern district of Georgia. I talked to a dear friend of mine who is
on the Georgia Supreme Court who said she has the temperament for a
judge. I talked to another practicing attorney, who had tried cases
before her and had competed with her when she was a practicing attorney
herself, who said: Johnny, she is tough. She is fair. But she has a
passion for the law, a passion for doing what is right.
I don't think you can come up with a finer endorsement than those
three quotes.
[[Page S15]]
I also join Senator Chambliss in acknowledging and studying one's
record. Some of her decisions I think have been outstanding. As a
former prosecutor, she understands the dangers our law enforcement
officers go through. She understands the value they serve. I think her
ruling not to stay the execution of a murderer of a Columbus, GA
policeman was absolutely the right decision. Her defense of the Georgia
death penalty law as being constitutional was not only appropriate but
right. Throughout all of her decisions, one thing is for sure: Whether
you agreed or not, she gave it the thought and time necessary to make
what she felt was the right decision.
In 2000, the Senate confirmed Judge Martin to the northern district
court in Georgia. It did so unanimously. It is my hope that on this day
the Senate once again will unanimously approve the confirmation of
Judge Beverly Martin to the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
I yield the floor, suggest the absence of a quorum, and ask unanimous
consent that the time be charged to each side.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SESSIONS. 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. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I wish to speak on the nomination of
Judge Beverly Baldwin Martin who President Obama nominated to the
Eleventh Circuit on June 19. I remain at a loss as to why it has taken
this long for her nomination to come before the full Senate for a vote.
Judge Martin's nomination is one of the few that has had strong
bipartisan support. Both of her home State Senators, Senator Chambliss
and Senator Isakson, have expressed their support for the President's
nominee from the beginning. I have also expressed my support for Judge
Martin and I believe she will be easily confirmed when the vote occurs.
As I have said many times, Republicans have been and are ready and
willing to proceed to a roll call vote on her nomination for months
but, for whatever reason, our Democratic colleagues, the leadership,
would not take yes for an answer. Instead, they chose to force votes on
controversial nominees such as David Hamilton and Andre Davis. Given
those nominees' records, it was no secret they would engender
opposition and that it would take some time for their records to be
examined and to be prepared for debate.
I do not know the reasons for not calling up Judge Martin's
nomination sooner. I hope it wasn't to purposely delay this
noncontroversial nomination in order to create an illusion that a lot
of judges are being obstructed. Certainly we have been accused of
obstructing nominations in the last few months and we have heard these
allegations repeated on the Senate floor and in the press, often
supported by inaccurate and misleading information. Some of my
Democratic colleagues have said they want to confirm judicial nominees
at the same pace the Democratic-controlled Senate confirmed President
Bush's nominees. I think my colleagues should be careful what they wish
for, because President Obama's nominees have fared far better than
President Bush's. For those who were not here then, and for those who
don't--or won't--remember, I wish to take a moment to describe exactly
what happened during that time.
President Bush began his Presidency by extending an olive branch and
renominating two prior Clinton nominees to seats on the Circuit Courts
of Appeal--one step removed from the Supreme Court. He renominated
Democratic nominees. How was he repaid for that? The Democrats took the
olive branch and broke it and gave it back to him. It began soon after
President Bush was elected when a group of well-known professors--
liberal activist professors--Laurence Tribe, Marsha Greenberger, and
Cass Sunstein, met with the Democratic leadership and proposed changing
the ground rules of the confirmation process in a meeting, apparently--
certainly not open to the public. They proposed that Senators should
consider a nominee's ideology--this had not been historically done--and
for the first time in the history of the country, they proposed that
the burden be shifted to the nominee to somehow prove they were worthy
of the appointment instead of having the Senate respect the presumptive
power of the President to make nominations and then object if that
nomination was a concern to them. So it was clear to me then that as a
result of that meeting, a majority of the Democrat Members of this body
agreed to what they proposed. After the Democrats took control in the
107th Congress, then-Majority Leader Daschle promised to ``use whatever
means necessary'' to defeat President Bush's judicial nominees.
Before the 2001 August recess, the Democrats granted hearings for
only two circuit court nominees, and one was Roger Gregory, a former
Clinton nominee who was renominated. They even refused to hold a
hearing for now-Chief Justice John Roberts. His nomination at the time
was to the District of Columbia circuit which had been scheduled for a
hearing before the change in the Senate majority. Then, in an
unprecedented and, I think, partisan move, our Democratic colleagues
indiscriminately returned every single one of President Bush's 40
pending judicial nominations. There was no consideration of an
individual nominee's record. There was no consideration of bipartisan
support for the nominee. It was a simple obstruction, it appeared to
me. Thirty of these nominees were later confirmed by voice vote or by a
substantial majority.
This was followed by another unprecedented event: the systematic
filibuster of highly qualified nominees, many of whom were later
confirmed by voice vote or a substantial majority. The Democrats
filibustered 30 attempts to hold up-or-down votes on at least 17
judicial nominees, highly qualified nominees--some rated unanimously
well qualified by the American Bar Association. Senator Reid summed up
what they were doing during the filibuster of Priscilla Owen--a
fabulous nominee; a justice on the Texas Supreme Court; a great lady--
he opposed her nomination and he said in his quote: ``There is not a
number of hours in the universe that would be sufficient'' to debate
her nomination.
So, today, we hear outrage that President Obama's nominees have been
waiting for weeks or months for a confirmation vote. President Bush's
nominees to the circuit courts waited an average of 350 days--almost a
year, on average; I was here--from nomination to confirmation. That was
just the average. The majority of President Bush's first nominees to
the circuit courts waited years for confirmation votes and some never
even received a hearing in committee, despite being highly qualified,
outstanding nominees. Priscilla Owen, Justice Owen of the Texas Supreme
Court, waited 4 years for a confirmation vote. John Roberts, Jeffrey
Sutton, and Deborah Cook all waited 2 years. Dennis Shedd and Michael
McConnell waited for more than a year and a half. Terrence Boyle, who
was nominated by President Bush for the Fourth Circuit, languished
close to 8 years and never received a vote, even though he passed out
of the Judiciary Committee with a majority, and the Democrats had the
majority. Miguel Estrada, rated unanimously well qualified by the
American Bar Association, was filibustered through seven cloture votes
and never confirmed. Charles Pickering, Carolyn Kuhl, Williams Myers,
Henry Saad, William Haynes--all I think outstanding nominees--all were
filibustered and never confirmed. So I ask my Democratic colleagues:
Did we have any outrage from that side then?
Let's look at the current pace of nominations. Unlike President Bush,
President Obama did not extend an olive branch by renominating any of
the outstanding pending nominees President Bush had submitted who were
being held up. In fact, he ignored a request by all of the Republican
Members of this body to do that. Instead, he chose Judge David Hamilton
as his first nominee. He could hardly be characterized as a consensus
nominee. Thirty-nine Senators--all Republicans--voted against him after
a full debate.
The treatment of President Obama's and President Bush's nominees for
the Fourth Circuit will illustrate what I am saying. During the 110th
Congress, despite the 33-percent vacancy rate on that court, four of
President Bush's
[[Page S16]]
well-qualified, consensus nominees to that court, the Fourth Circuit,
were needlessly delayed and ultimately blocked. President Bush
nominated Steve Matthews in September of 2007. Despite his stellar
qualifications, he was forced to wait 485 days to even get a hearing
and the hearing never came. His nomination was returned in January of
2009. Chief Judge Robert Conrad of the district court had the support
of his home State Senators and received an ABA rating of unanimously
well qualified. Despite overwhelming support and exceptional
qualifications, including having played point guard for Clemson in the
ACC, he waited 585 days for a hearing that never came. His nomination
was returned. Judge Glen Conrad had been chosen by Janet Reno,
President Clinton's Attorney General, to investigate one of the
allegations against President Clinton. Out of all of the prosecutors in
America, she chose Judge Conrad. It is an outrage that he was not
confirmed. He was a stellar nominee and should have been confirmed. The
bar respected him and so did the Democratic administration.
Finally, Rod Rosenstein, whom the ABA rated unanimously well-
qualified and who served in the Department of Justice in both Democrat
and Republican administrations, waited 414 days for a hearing that
never came. His nomination was returned on January 2, 2009.
President Obama's Fourth Circuit nominees have fared far better. Take
Judge Andre Davis. He received a hearing a mere 27 days after his
nomination, a committee vote just 36 days later, and was confirmed in
early November of last year. Justice Barbara Milano Keenan was
nominated on September 14, 2009. She received a hearing just 22 days
later and was voted out of committee 23 days after that. Both Judge
Albert Diaz and Judge James Wynn were nominated on November 4, 2009.
The committee quickly held their hearing on December 16, 2009--despite
the fact that the Senate was consumed with the healthcare debate--and
their nominations are listed on the committee's agenda for this week.
The raw numbers also demonstrate that this is not the simple ``apples
to apples'' comparison that some have tried to make it out to be.
President Obama has nominated little more than half the judicial
nominees that President Bush had nominated at this point in his
Presidency. Despite holding a time consuming Supreme Court confirmation
hearing, the Judiciary Committee has still managed to hold hearings for
all of President Obama's nominees, except for the few that were
nominated just before the recess last month and were not ripe for
hearings before the break. Compare that to this point under President
Bush when 31 of his judicial nominees had yet to receive hearings.
And, not only has the Senate confirmed nearly the same percentage of
President Obama's judicial nominees as were confirmed at this point
under President Bush, but we are moving faster. Indeed, President
Obama's circuit court nominees have received confirmation votes mere
months after being nominated--far quicker than President Bush's circuit
court nominees, who waited an average of 350 days. Many waited years
and many never even received an up-or-down vote. The simple fact is
that President Obama has nominated fewer and we have confirmed more.
All of this is not to lay the groundwork for some sort of payback,
but to set the record straight. Republicans have not held a private
retreat to plot how to block judicial nominees. We have not taken
orders from outside groups to block nominees based on their ideology.
We have not blocked nominees because we do not want them to sit on a
specific case. We have not once attempted to filibuster nominees in the
Judiciary Committee. That is how Democrats treated President Bush's
nominees. Those are the facts.
We have not and will not do any of those things. Instead, we will
continue to thoroughly analyze the records of President Obama's
nominees, and hold fair and rigorous hearings to ensure that each
nominee possesses the impartiality, the commitment to the rule of law,
the integrity, the legal expertise, and the judicial restraint
necessary to sit on our Nation's judiciary.
As ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, I look forward to
continuing to work with the chairman to process nominations in the
bipartisan manner that we have established over the past year.
I yield the floor.
I see our outstanding chairman, Senator Leahy, is here. I know he
wants to get back to the committee. I appreciate his leadership. He is
a person I enjoy working with. We spat a little over these nominations,
but he allows us to have full and fair hearings when we have them, and
I think I can't ask for more than that.
I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont is recognized.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, as we return for the second session of the
111th Congress, the Senate at last considers the long-stalled
nomination of Judge Beverly Martin of Georgia to the Court of Appeals
for the Eleventh Circuit. Even though Judge Martin is a well-respected
district court judge with the strong support of both of her home State
Republican Senators, Senator Chambliss and Senator Isakson, her
nomination has been stuck on the Senate Executive Calendar for over 4
months since it was promptly reported by the Judiciary Committee
without a single dissenting vote.
The delays for consideration of the nomination of Judge Martin, along
with delays for seven other judicial nominations currently on the
Senate's Executive Calendar, are the result of a Republican strategy to
stall, delay, and obstruct that began last year. I urge the Senate
Republican leadership to reconsider their strategy and instead join
with us and with President Obama to fill the more than 100 vacancies
that have now accumulated on our Federal courts around the country.
The obstructionist tactics that we saw last year from Republicans led
to the lowest number of judicial confirmations in more than 50 years.
Only 12 of President Obama's judicial nominations to Federal circuit
and district courts were confirmed all last year. The 12 Federal
circuit and district court nominees confirmed last year was less than
half of what we achieved during President Bush's first tumultuous year.
In the second half of 2001, a Democratic Senate majority proceeded to
confirm 28 judges. In the 17 months that I chaired the Senate Judiciary
Committee during President Bush's first term, the Senate confirmed 100
of his judicial nominees.
Republicans have refused to agree to the consideration of qualified,
noncontroversial nominees for weeks and months. Last December, only 3
of the available 13 judicial nominations on the Senate Executive
Calendar were considered. By contrast, in December 2001, the first year
of President Bush's administration, Senate Democrats proceeded to
confirm 10 of his judicial nominees. At the end of the Senate's 2001
session, only four judicial nominations were left on the Senate
Executive Calendar, all of which were confirmed soon after the Senate
returned in 2002. At the end of President Clinton's first year, just
one judicial nominee was left on the Senate Executive Calendar. At the
end of President George H.W. Bush's first year, a Democratic Senate
majority left just two judicial nominations pending on the Senate
Executive Calendar.At the end of the first year of President Reagan's
first term--a year in which the Senate confirmed 41 of his Federal
circuit and district court nominees--not a single judicial nomination
was left on the Senate Executive Calendar. This past December, Senate
Republicans left 10 judicial nominees without Senate action and
insisted on returning 2 of them to the President so that they would
have to be renominated.
None of the eight judicial nominations currently pending on the
Executive Calendar are controversial. Six were reported by the Senate
Judiciary Committee without a single dissenting vote. We have wasted
weeks and months having to seek time agreements in order to consider
nominations that were reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee
unanimously and then confirmed unanimously by the Senate once they were
finally allowed to be considered.
Judicial vacancies have now skyrocketed to over 100, undoing years of
hard work. The lack of Senate action last year is attributable to
Senate Republicans and no one else. President Obama has reached across
the aisle to
[[Page S17]]
consult with Republican Senators. The nomination before the Senate
today is another example of that. He has made quality nominations.
While President Obama has moved beyond the judicial nominations battles
of the past and reached out to work with Republicans and make
mainstream nominations, Senate Republicans continue their tactics of
delay.
When President Bush worked with Senators across the aisle, I praised
him and expedited consideration of his nominees. When President Obama
reaches across the aisle, the Senate Republican leadership delays and
obstructs his qualified nominees. The Republican leadership has
returned to their practices in the 1990s, which resulted in more than
doubling circuit court vacancies, and led to the pocket filibuster of
more than 60 of President Clinton's nominees. The crisis they created
eventually led even to public criticism of their actions by Chief
Justice Rehnquist during those years.
Instead of praising President Obama for consulting with Republican
Senators, the Senate Republican leadership has doubled back on what
they demanded when a Republican President was in the White House. No
more do they talk about each nominee being entitled to an up-or-down
vote. That position is abandoned and forgotten. Instead, they now seek
to filibuster and delay judicial and even executive nominations. They
have also abandoned their initial position at the start of this
Congress that they would filibuster judicial nominees on which home
State Senators were not consulted. It turned out such consultation and
home State Republican Senator support did not matter when they
unsuccessfully filibustered President Obama's first judicial nominee,
Judge David Hamilton. He was filibustered despite the support of
Senator Lugar, his home State Senator and the longest serving
Republican in the Senate.
Despite the fact that President Obama began sending judicial nominees
to the Senate 2 months earlier than President Bush, last year's total
was the fewest judicial nominees confirmed in his first year of a
Presidency since 1953, a year in which President Eisenhower only made
nine nominations all of which were confirmed. The number of
confirmations was even below the 17 the Senate Republican majority
allowed confirmation in the 1996 session.
This is wrong. The American people deserve better. The cost will be
felt by ordinary Americans seeking justice in our overburdened Federal
courts.
During President Bush's last year in office, we had reduced judicial
vacancies to as low as 34, even though it was a Presidential election
year. When President Bush left office, we had reduced vacancies in 9 of
the 13 Federal circuits. As matters stand today, judicial vacancies
have spiked and are being left unfilled. We started 2010 with the
highest number of vacancies on article III courts since 1994, when the
vacancies created by the last comprehensive judgeship bill were still
being filled. While it has been nearly 20 years since we enacted a
Federal judgeship bill, judicial vacancies are nearing record levels,
with 102 current vacancies and another 21 already announced. If we had
proceeded on the judgeship bill recommended by the Judicial Conference
to address the growing burden on our Federal judiciary, as we did in
1984 and 1990, in order to provide the resources the courts need,
current vacancies would stand over 160 today. That is the true measure
of how far behind we have fallen. Justice should not be delayed or
denied to any American because of overburdened courts and the lack of
Federal judges.
We have seen this unprecedented obstruction by Senate Republicans on
issue after issue--over 100 filibusters last year alone, which has
affected 70 percent of all Senate action. Instead of time agreements
and the will of the majority, the Senate is faced with a requirement to
find 60 Senators to overcome a filibuster on issue after issue. Those
who just a short time ago said that a majority vote is all that should
be needed to confirm a nomination, and that filibusters of nominations
are unconstitutional, have reversed themselves and now employ any
delaying tactic they can.
These obstruction tactics took dangerous lows last year when Senate
Republicans voted to leave our troops without funding at a time when we
are fighting two wars. Had the Senate Republican filibuster of the
Defense Department appropriations bill been successful, they would have
cut off funding for our troops in the field. Senate Republicans also
filibustered the veterans bill.
Judge Martin's nomination is the longest pending of the judicial
nominees currently on the Executive Calendar. Judge Martin is a well-
respected Federal district court judge. Her nomination received a
unanimous rating of ``well qualified'' from the American Bar
Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary and has the
support of both Republican home State Senators, Senator Chambliss and
Senator Isakson. Judge Martin has spent 25 years in public service as a
Federal judge, as U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Georgia, as
an Assistant U.S. attorney in that office, and as an assistant attorney
general in the Office of the Attorney General of Georgia. Judge
Martin's nomination should have been an easy one to have confirmed
months ago. Republicans should have thanked President Obama for
consulting with the home State Republican Senators and moved forward. I
wish we could have reached a time agreement sooner. It should not have
taken 4 months.
I urge Senate Republicans to reconsider their strategy and allow
prompt consideration of the other judicial nominees awaiting Senate
consideration: Judge Joseph Greenaway of New Jersey, nominated to the
Third Circuit; Justice Barbara Keenan of Virginia, nominated to the
Fourth Circuit; Jane Stranch of Tennessee, nominated to the Sixth
Circuit; Judge Thomas Vanaskie of Pennsylvania, nominated to the Third
Circuit; Judge Denny Chin of New York, nominated to the Second Circuit;
Rosanna Malouf Peterson, nominated to the Eastern District of
Washington; and William Conley, nominated to the Western District of
Wisconsin.
Mr. President, I will reserve the remainder of my time and yield 6
minutes to the Senator from Delaware, an extraordinarily valuable
member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware is recognized.
Mr. KAUFMAN. I thank the Senator. It is a pleasure to serve with him
on the Judiciary Committee and see the work he is doing.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning
business for 6 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
in praise of lisa brown
Mr. KAUFMAN. I rise once again to recognize one of America's great
Federal employees.
One year ago today, Barack Obama took the oath of office as President
of the United States. As with every change in administration, the White
House welcomed many new staff members, appointed by the President to
help him carry out his policy goals.
I have spoken many times about career Federal employees who serve
regardless of which political party controls the executive branch.
Today, I want to use my time to highlight the important work performed
by those Federal employees who serve in appointee positions. Although
their jobs depend on the outcome of elections and political
circumstances, they are no less accountable to the people and no less
dedicated in their service.
This holds true for the appointees from both parties, who, given the
opportunity, eagerly leave jobs in the private and nonprofit sectors to
serve in government. Many of our Nation's elected leaders once served
in this capacity, including some of my Senate colleagues.
On this first anniversary of President Obama's inauguration, many are
reflecting on the past 12 months and trying to gauge his
administration's success. One thing I am certain about is that he could
not carry out his ambitious agenda without the help of the talented
White House staff.
The great Federal employee I am honoring today has the challenging
job of making sure the White House staff are working together and that
all of the information the President needs reaches his desk.
Lisa Brown serves as White House staff secretary. It is a position
many
[[Page S18]]
Americans are unfamiliar with, but it is one of the most important in
the West Wing. The staff secretary is responsible for keeping the lines
of communication between the President and his senior staff open and
organized. Nearly every memo destined for the President's desk must
first pass through the hands of the staff secretary, who filters the
most pressing items and ensures that the President's decisions are
conveyed to the appropriate staff member. Think about how complex that
is.
Lisa is a native of Connecticut, and she graduated magna cum laude
from Princeton with a degree in political economy. She also holds a law
degree with honors from the University of Chicago.
After clerking for the late Judge John Godbold, on the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Alabama, Lisa was a partner at the
Washington law firm Shea & Gardner. While working in the private
sector, she also engaged in pro bono work in the area of civil rights
and disabilities law. During that time, Lisa gained valuable expertise
in these fields, which she would later put to use in her government
service.
In 1996, Lisa began working as an attorney adviser in the Justice
Department's Office of Legal Counsel. After a year in that role, she
was appointed deputy counsel to Vice President Gore, and in 1999 she
was appointed as his counsel. At the same time, Lisa served on the
executive board of the President's Committee for Employment of People
with Disabilities. She also worked on legislative issues with the Vice
President's Domestic Policy Office.
After the Clinton administration ended, Lisa moved to the nonprofit
sector, where she became executive director of the American
Constitution Society for Law and Policy. When President Obama was
elected, he asked her to return to government service as a key part of
his White House team.
Despite her busy schedule in one of America's most stressful work
environments, Lisa still finds time to raise a 6-year-old son with her
husband Kevin. Juggling family responsibilities and a demanding
workload is a challenge she shares with many other West Wing staffers.
Lisa and other political appointees are a living reminder of the
elective nature of our government. When the people decide to give
control of the executive branch to the party in opposition, that party
is always ready to call on a cadre of talented and dedicated citizens
ready to shape policy.
Many of them bring to their jobs the unique perspective of having
worked for a previous administration, and they frequently leave higher
paying jobs to return to government service. When they do so, they are
not only signing on to serve the President. They also commit to long
and stressful hours working on behalf of the American people to whom
the President and his West Wing staff are answerable.
Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will join me in honoring the
service of Lisa Brown and all those working and who have worked in the
West Wing under Presidents Obama, Bush, Clinton, and their
predecessors.
I yield the floor.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. LEAHY. 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. LEAHY. Mr. President, I see the distinguished assistant
Republican leader on the floor. I ask unanimous consent that all time
remaining on either side be yielded back.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, have the yeas and nays been requested on
the nominee?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not.
Mr. LEAHY. I ask for the yeas and nays on the nominee.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination
of Beverly Baldwin Martin, of Georgia, to be United States Circuit
Judge for the Eleventh Circuit?
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Udall) is
necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Missouri (Mr. Bond) and the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 97, nays 0, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 1 Ex.]
YEAS--97
Akaka
Alexander
Barrasso
Baucus
Bayh
Begich
Bennet
Bennett
Bingaman
Boxer
Brown
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Burris
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
DeMint
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagan
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson
Kaufman
Kerry
Kirk
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
LeMieux
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (NE)
Nelson (FL)
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Risch
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shaheen
Shelby
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Tester
Thune
Udall (NM)
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NOT VOTING--3
Bond
Roberts
Udall (CO)
The nomination was confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The President will be immediately notified of
the Senate's actions.
____________________