[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 30 (Thursday, March 4, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1153-S1154]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXECUTIVE SESSION
______
NOMINATION OF WILLIAM M. CONLEY TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR
THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will go
into executive session to consider the following nomination:
The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of William M.
Conley, of Wisconsin, to be United States District Judge for the
Western District of Wisconsin.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from North Dakota (Mr.
Dorgan) is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Shaheen). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 99, nays 0, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 43 Ex.]
YEAS--99
Akaka
Alexander
Barrasso
Baucus
Bayh
Begich
Bennet
Bennett
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brown (MA)
Brown (OH)
Brownback
Bunning
Burr
Burris
Byrd
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
DeMint
Dodd
Durbin
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagan
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson
Kaufman
Kerry
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
Roberts
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shaheen
Shelby
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Tester
Thune
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NOT VOTING--1
Dorgan
The nomination was confirmed.
Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, the Senate has finally taken action on
the nomination of Judge William Conley to be a U.S. district court
judge in the Western District of Wisconsin. Judge Conley was reported
by the Senate Judiciary Committee without objection last year, on
December 10. That is almost 3 months ago. He has waited for this day
for some time.
I had hoped that Mr. Conley's confirmation process would resemble
those of Judge Christina Reiss of Vermont and Judge Abdul Kallon of
Alabama. Those nominees received relatively prompt consideration by the
Senate, and they should serve as a model for Senate action. Sadly, they
are the exception rather than the rule. They show what the Senate could
do, but does not. Time and again, noncontroversial nominees are
delayed.
The Senate is far behind where we should be in helping to fill
judicial vacancies. Vacancies have skyrocketed to more than 100 and
more have been announced. We need to do better. The American people
deserve better.
As with so many other nominations before the Senate, Judge Conley has
waited an extraordinary amount of time to be confirmed. Instead of time
agreements and the will of the majority, the Senate is faced with
delays by Senate Republicans. Earlier this week we had to overcome
Republican objection and a filibuster to obtain a vote on the
nomination of Judge Barbara Keenan. She, too, was confirmed
unanimously, 99 to zero. Yet Republicans would not agree to schedule a
vote on her nomination. She was forced to wait four months after being
reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the Senate was required
to end the Republican filibuster.
In addition to Judge Keenan and Judge Conley, there are 17 additional
judicial nominations on the Senate Executive Calendar, all of which
have been considered and favorably reported by the Senate Judiciary
Committee. Thirteen of those judicial nominations received unanimous or
strong bipartisan support in the Judiciary Committee. They should all
be considered without further delay. Debate and votes should be
scheduled on all of the judicial nominees being stalled. Those opposed
by a minority should be debated and then receive a vote.
Only 16 Federal circuit and district court judges have been
considered by the Senate so far during President Obama's 13 months in
office. By this date during President Bush's first term, the Senate had
confirmed 39 judicial nominees.
I remain very concerned about the new standard the Republican
minority is applying to many of President Obama's district court
nominees. Democrats never used this standard with President Bush's
nominees, whether we were in the majority or the minority. In 8 years,
the Judiciary Committee reported only a single Bush district court
nomination by a party-line vote. That was the nomination of Leon
Holmes, who was opposed not because of some litmus test, but because of
his strident, intemperate, and insensitive public statements over the
years. During President Obama's short time in office, not one, not two,
but three district court nominees have been reported on a party-line
vote. I hope this new standard does not become the rule for Senate
Republicans.
In December, I made several statements in this chamber about the need
for progress on the nominees reported by the Senate Judiciary
Committee. I also spoke repeatedly to Senate leaders on both sides of
the aisle and made the following proposal: Agree to immediate votes on
those judicial nominees that are reported by the Senate Judiciary
Committee without dissent, and agree to time agreements to debate and
vote on the others. I reiterated my proposal earlier this week and do
so, again, now: I urge Senate Republicans to reconsider their strategy
of obstruction and allow prompt consideration of all 18 judicial
nominees currently awaiting final Senate consideration. There is no
need for these nominations to be dragged out week after week, month
after month.
[[Page S1154]]
After 3 months of delay, today we finally considered the nomination
of William Conley. Mr. Conley is a partner in the Madison, WI, office
of Foley and Lardner, where he is widely recognized as a top antitrust
and appellate lawyer. He has represented clients before the U.S.
Supreme Court, the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and the Seventh Circuit,
among others. Mr. Conley attended the University of Wisconsin, where he
earned his B.A. and J.D. with honors. Mr. Conley also served as a law
clerk for Judge Thomas Fairchild on the Seventh Circuit. I congratulate
Judge Conley on his confirmation today. I look forward to the time when
the 17 additional judicial nominees being stalled are released from the
holds and objections that are preventing votes on them and their
confirmations.
I, again, urge Senate Republicans to reconsider their strategy and
allow prompt consideration of all 18 judicial nominees awaiting Senate
consideration, not just William Conley of Wisconsin but also the
following nominees: 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;
Justice Rogeriee Thompson of Rhode Island, nominated to the First
Circuit; Judge James Wynn of North Carolina, nominated to the Fourth
Circuit; Judge Albert Diaz of North Carolina, nominated to the Fourth
Circuit; Judge Edward Chen, nominated to the Northern District of
California; and Justice Louis Butler, nominated to the Western District
of Wisconsin; Nancy Freudenthal, nominated to the District of Wyoming;
Denzil Marshall, nominated to the Eastern District of Arkansas; Benita
Pearson, nominated to the Northern District of Ohio; Timothy Black,
nominated to the Southern District of Ohio; Gloria M. Navarro,
nominated to the District of Nevada; Audrey G. Fleissig, nominated to
the Eastern District of Missouri; Lucy H. Koh, nominated to the
Northern District of California; Jon E. DeGuilio, nominated to the
Northern District of Indiana; and Tanya Walton Pratt, nominated to the
Southern District of Indiana.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. A motion to reconsider is considered made and
laid on the table. The President shall be notified of the Senate's
action.
____________________