[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 82 (Thursday, May 27, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4507-S4509]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--EXECUTIVE CALENDAR
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, on the Executive Calendar, I ask unanimous
consent the Senate proceed to executive session to consider en bloc
Executive Calendar Nos. 427, 493, 494, 688, 500, 501, 521, 556, 581,
588, 589, and a number of others that the minority, I am sure, is aware
of, and it includes all nominations on the Secretary's desk in the Air
Force, Army, Foreign Service, Marine Corps and Navy--these are military
people waiting to get their increases in rank. They have all been
cleared and they need to be cleared so they can get their increases in
rank--that the nominations be confirmed en bloc, the motions to
reconsider be laid on the table en bloc, that no further motions be in
order, that any statements relating to the nominations be printed in
the Record, that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's
action and the Senate resume legislative session.
These are nominees, as I said. First of all, they are military people
waiting for their increase in rank. But it is also people such as Brian
Hayes, a member of the NLRB; Mark Pearce, member of the NLRB, et
cetera, et cetera.
Craig Becker, member of the NLRB; Anthony Coscia, Amtrak board of
directors; Mark Rosekind, member of the NTSB. Here is David Lopez,
general counsel of the EEOC. Here is Michael Punke, Deputy U.S. Trade
Representative; Islam Siddiqui, Chief Ag Negotiator for the U.S. Trade
Representative; Jeffrey Moreland, director of Amtrak; Carolyn Radelet,
Deputy Director of the Peace Corps; Lana Pollack, Commissioner of U.S.
International Joint Commission for the U.S. and Canada. And there are a
number of others. I will not go through them all. They are a number of
people who need to be in place to make our government work and run.
That is who we are trying to ask unanimous consent that we can get them
confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard. The Republican leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I would say to my good friend from
Iowa, the majority leader and I have been working on a package of
nominations. Unfortunately, we are snagged over one particular
nomination which has already been defeated by the Senate, and that was
the nomination of Craig Becker to be on the NLRB. The President then
recessed Mr. Becker and recessed a Democratic nomination to the NLRB
but not a Republican nominee to the
[[Page S4508]]
NLRB. There is a fundamental lack of equity and fairness involved, and
that has been a significant hindrance in coming to a consent agreement.
Obviously, before we leave we will clear the military nominations.
Those are really not in dispute. But typically what happens here before
a recess, the majority leader and I get together and we try to work out
as many of these as we can. To just clear the whole calendar involves,
in addition, clearing judges who just got out of committee this week.
We have a way that we sequence those who have been acceptable to both
sides.
In short, I have not seen every single name on the list of the
Senator from Iowa, but it is simply not the way we are going to go
forward, certainly not this evening.
Accordingly, I would now ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to executive session to consider en bloc the following list of
nominations that I will send to the desk. This is a list of
approximately 60 nominations from the Executive Calendar.
I further ask unanimous consent that the nominations be confirmed en
bloc, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, the President
be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate resume
legislative session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. HARKIN. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard. The Senator from Iowa.
Mr. HARKIN. I say to my friend from Kentucky, fairness and equity?
OK. Let's talk about fairness and equity. Let's talk about this. Mr.
Becker was brought up in our committee last fall, along with Mark
Pearce and Mr. Brian Hayes. They all went through our committee--
bipartisan. Mr. Enzi, the ranking Republican on our committee, voted
for that, and so did the Senator from Alaska, Ms. Murkowski.
The names were then forwarded to the Senate. They came to the Senate,
and the leadership on the Republican side decided to filibuster--
decided to filibuster. We had an agreement to move this package forward
on the National Labor Relations Board.
Fairness and equity? Since 1985, we have never had a hearing for a
member to be on the National Labor Relations Board who wasn't nominated
for Chair because when the Republicans were in power, they would have
their people, we would have ours, we would agree, and they would go
through. That is what we did last fall with Mr. Becker and Mr. Pearce
and Mr. Hayes. And I thought things were fine. That is the way we have
always done things. We agreed. We came out on the floor. And then the
Republican leadership decided to filibuster--decided to filibuster.
Well, what happened then was that at the end of the year--I want to
set the record straight here--what happens is at the end of the last
session, there is always a unanimous consent to carry over the
calendar, the Executive Calendar, from one session to the next.
One Senator, the Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain, objected to Mr.
Becker. Under the rules of the Senate, then Mr. Becker had to go back
to the White House and get renominated and sent back to the Senate.
The Republicans asked for a hearing on Mr. Becker. Now, mind you, we
have never had a hearing on one of these people since 1985. As the
chair of the relevant committee, I did not have to have a hearing. But
I decided, Mr. Becker has nothing to hide. He is willing to confront
and answer all questions in open session. So I agreed to have a
hearing.
I could have had a hearing on Mr. Hayes, also, the Republican, but I
said: No, we do not have to do that.
So I had a hearing. We brought Mr. Becker before the committee, in
open session, to answer any questions anyone asked him. If I am not
mistaken, I think only three people showed up to ask him questions. But
what they did is they submitted questions in writing. The Republicans
submitted 440 written questions to Mr. Becker, almost twice what they
did for Justice Sotomayor going on the Supreme Court. There were 440
written questions, and Mr. Becker obliged and answered all of those
questions. Well, the Republicans still objected--still objected.
Now the minority leader says he failed a vote in the Senate. That is
not true because there was a filibuster. We needed 60 votes to overcome
the filibuster. When we brought up Mr. Becker's name, he got 52 votes
on the Senate floor. Quite frankly, he would have had more, but there
were several Senators who were absent because of weather conditions. I
know who said on the Record that they would have supported him. So it
is not quite right when the minority leader says Mr. Becker did not get
approved on the Senate floor. He did. He just could not get the 60
votes to overcome the Republican filibuster.
So, again, you know, Mr. Becker is well qualified. Even my Republican
colleagues freely admitted that in the committee, that he was well
qualified. Do you know what their objection was? He comes from a union
background. He comes from a union background. To the Republicans, that
is a mortal sin. Well, if you are Catholic, you know what that means.
That is a mortal sin. That is unforgivable to Republicans to have a
union background.
As I said, he was willing to answer any questions. He did, in
writing. I have heard nothing--nothing from the Republican side
pointing to some answer he gave that would disqualify him from being on
the NLRB. They have simply drawn a line in the sand and said that
because he has a union background, they are not going to support him
and they are going to filibuster.
So here we are. We wanted to get through all of those nominations
tonight. I read some of them. I did not read them all. Ambassador to
the Slovak Republic, Ambassador to the Dominican Republic, Ambassador
to Niger, Deputy Director of the Peace Corps--they will not let them go
through. Why? Because of one person--Mr. Becker--who has a union
background and they do not want him on the NLRB.
Well, Mr. Becker has a recess appointment. He did get a recess
appointment from the President. But they will not let him get a full
appointment by the President. And they are willing to stop everything,
stop every nomination because of their objections to Craig Becker even
through Craig Becker got 52 votes here on the Senate floor.
So when the minority leader talks about fairness and equity, well, I
think the fairness and equity is on this side of the aisle on this one.
I am sorry to say that a lot of these people will not get their
nominations. But, again, the Republicans do not care. They do not care.
They would just as soon the government stop everything.
Do they care whether we have enough people in the Peace Corps to run
the Peace Corps? They do not care. Do they care whether we have an
Ambassador to the Slovak Republic? They do not care. Do they care if we
have members on the TVA, the Tennessee Valley Authority, board of
directors? Obviously not. They have been holding up these nominees for
a long time. This is not the first time they have held up these
nominees.
So fairness and equity? Well, I wish the minority side would show a
little fairness and equity when it comes to decency and to abiding by
agreements. We had an agreement. We had an agreement to move these
people through as a package. We did that in committee. That agreement
was broken by the Republicans, not by the Democrats.
I am sorry to have to take this time on the floor to correct my
friend from Kentucky on fairness and equity, but I think the public has
a right to know why we are where we are right now and who is
responsible for the fact that we cannot get nominations through here on
the Senate floor.
I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum
call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DURBIN. I was trying to get down here when Senator Harkin was
completing his remarks, to join him, because I am as concerned as he is
about the impact of these nominations that still remain on our
Executive Calendar here at the Senate.
[[Page S4509]]
This publication comes out on a daily basis to tell us which
nominations have been sent to the floor of the Senate by the
committees. They do not reach the floor of the Senate until a process
is followed which involves nomination by the President of the United
States, an investigation of the nominee by agencies of the government
and by our committees, and then consideration of those nominees.
Many committees have hearings where the nominees are called before
them. Questions can be asked. They certainly are in the Judiciary
Committee where I serve. Then, at the end of the day the committee
decides whether to submit this nominee's name for the consideration of
the full Senate.
So the fact that Senator Harkin came to the floor this evening is an
indication of the frustration many of us feel about what has happened.
So far since President Obama took office last year, the Senate has
had rollcall votes on 51 nominations. There are others who have been
approved without rollcalls. But of those 51 nominations which were
subjected to rollcall votes, 22 were confirmed with more than 90 votes
and 18 were confirmed with 70 votes or more. That means that almost 80
percent of those nominees have passed with overwhelming support.
Many of those votes took place after lengthy delays. In other words,
these men and women who agreed to serve our Nation and to serve the
President and made personal sacrifices to do that went through the long
and arduous process, made it to the Senate calendar, and then had to
wait. On average, the President's nominees have languished on this
Senate calendar for over 105 days, with many taking much longer; more
than 3 months for those who were sent to the Senate floor. I know
because some of these nominees are people I have met and worked with,
even people I have recommended to the President. It is an uneasy
feeling to be nominated, to be waiting for your opportunity to serve in
positions large and small, and then to be told, day after weary day,
that the Senate just did not get around to it.
This week the Executive Calendar contains more than 107 names of
nominees. More than 85 percent of those nominees came through the
committee process with overwhelming support. Point of comparison for
those who will say: The Republicans may be playing games now with
nominations, but I am sure you Democrats did the same thing to
President Bush.
Not true. At this time in President George W. Bush's Presidency,
there were exactly 13 nominees on the calendar. There are over 107
nominees on the calendar at this moment. There is no comparison.
It is time for the Republicans to stop abusing the Senate's
responsibility to provide advice and consent on the President's well-
qualified nominees. If I take a look at some of these nominees, it is
troubling because they are overwhelmingly qualified for the jobs for
which they have been recommended.
The Illinois nominees currently on the calendar include Craig Becker
to be a member of the National Labor Relations Board. He was recess-
appointed after waiting for 16 weeks on the calendar. Mary Smith to be
Assistant Attorney General, she has been on the calendar for more than
16 weeks. Gary Scott Feinerman, to be U.S. district judge for the
Northern District of Illinois, has been waiting 6 weeks. He is a man
eminently qualified who was passed out of the Judiciary Committee by
voice vote. Sharon Johnson Coleman, another nominee from Illinois to be
U.S. district judge, again approved by voice vote unanimously, has been
sitting on the calendar for 6 weeks. Robert Wedgeworth to be a member
of the National Museum and Library Services Board, has been waiting for
4 weeks; Carla D. Hayden, to be a member of the National Museum and
Library Services Board, another 4 weeks; and Darryl McPherson, who we
would like to have serve as a U.S. marshal in the Northern District of
Illinois. He was just sent to the calendar. This is an indication. In
the Northern District of Illinois, several years ago, we had the tragic
murder of the family of a U.S. district court judge. So when we talk
about filling the position of U.S. marshal in that particular district,
it is because we know that there is a vulnerability for the men and
women serving the government as judges, a vulnerability which resulted
in a tragedy for one of our more celebrated and liked Federal judges in
Chicago.
Why would we hold up this man's nomination? Wouldn't we want the U.S.
marshal in place doing his job? It is an important responsibility
administratively, but it is equally important to protect the men and
women in the judiciary. Why would we want to delay that when we have
been through the tragic murder of a family in the Northern District of
Illinois?
That is why I wanted to join Senator Harkin. We are leaving now for a
little over a week over Memorial Day. Many of us will be back home for
Memorial Day, then moving around in different places. This calendar
will sit here for another 10 or 12 days. The men and women whose names
are in nomination will wait another 12 days or 2 weeks before they can
be considered. In the meantime, their lives are on hold. Their service
to our country is delayed. The President's ability to put his team
together has been diminished by this strategy from the Republican side.
Tonight Senator Harkin tried to move 51 of these nominees. Senator
McConnell objected. It is unfortunate, truly unfortunate, that we don't
step forward and give these men and women a chance to serve the
government and give the President a chance to have those in place who
will make his administration complete. That is the only fair thing for
us to do.
I hope when we return we will come to our senses and take a different
strategy. More than 107 men and women whose names are on this calendar
are waiting for us to make that decision. In fairness to the President
and to the Nation, I hope we make it with dispatch.
____________________