[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 102 (Monday, July 12, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5732-S5735]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                           NASA Authorization

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, while we are waiting on other 
Senators who wish to speak on this judge, I wish to briefly inform the 
Senate that this coming Thursday, the full Commerce Committee will 
consider a number of bills that it will mark up. Among them is the 
authorization bill for NASA.
  We are building consensus in what has otherwise been a consensusless 
position of the future of the manned space program. The President had 
proposed one thing. He altered that. Different people have different 
ideas. Different aerospace companies all looking to have a certain part 
of the manned space program also have their different ideas.
  Out of this mix, we are trying to bring together Senators to build a 
consensus in a bipartisan way; the space program is not only not 
partisan, it is not even bipartisan. It is nonpartisan--to be able to 
do this in a fairly unanimous way.
  I am happy to report to the Senate that I think we are getting there. 
I believe what we will have is the essence of the President's proposal. 
It will still have the continuation of the President's proposal for 
competition among commercial space companies to deliver not only cargo 
to the International Space Station, of which the President recommended, 
and we will certainly

[[Page S5733]]

authorize extending the life of the space station to 2020, something on 
which we have spent $100 billion. It did not make sense, as was 
proposed before, to cut it out in 2015, something we spent that much 
money on and are just now completing its construction. These commercial 
companies would, in this authorization bill, have the direction as to 
how they go about man rating their systems in order to have the safety, 
when you strap human beings on to rockets that defy the laws of 
gravity, to take a human being into low-Earth orbit to rendezvous and 
dock with the space station and to return safely. That is one thing.
  The next thing on which we are building a consensus is to accelerate 
the development of a heavy-lift vehicle. The President said no later 
than 2015. We are going to authorize NASA to start in 2011 and to take 
a lot of the existing technology and build upon that, make it evolvable 
with a heavy-lift vehicle that would be in the range of 75 metric tons 
in order to get space assets in the low-Earth orbit to ultimately 
fulfill the President's goal as stated in his speech to the Kennedy 
Space Center, which was to go to Mars by a flexible path. His specific 
timeline was to rendezvous and land on an asteroid by 2025. We 
accelerate the development of the heavy-lift vehicle.
  Because the hardware is there and ready, will be on the pad, we are 
going to authorize an additional flight of the space shuttle. This is 
the shuttle that they call the ``launch on need.'' It is a second space 
shuttle that is on the pad for the remaining two, in case they get into 
trouble. It becomes a rescue shuttle to get the marooned astronauts, 
were that to be the case.
  The fact is, they are doing so well now, and now that we are going to 
and from the space station on these final two missions, the likelihood 
of anything happening is de minimis and, therefore, we are going to 
authorize the flying of that last shuttle, the launch on need, because 
we believe there is a minimal risk. If something did happen on ascent--
such as a piece of foam coming off and hitting the wing and knocking a 
hole in it, which was the cause of the destruction of the Space Shuttle 
Columbia back in 2003--then the astronauts would be able to take safe 
harbor in the International Space Station, and they would then be able 
to be returned to Earth by other vehicles, such as the Russian Soyuz, 
which is a permanent lifeboat that is attached--two of them--to the 
International Space Station.
  We will continue in this authorization bill a robust research and 
development program. We will continue the President's recommendations 
for his science budget, for his aeronautics budget of NASA, and all of 
this will be within the amount of money the President has proposed.
  This NASA authorization bill will be for 3 years. We are expecting 
that we will be able to take this up this Thursday and to pass it out 
of the full Commerce Committee.
  We, of course, in respect to the appropriations process, have been in 
close consultation with our colleagues on the Appropriations Committee. 
How the authorization committee and the Appropriations Committee worked 
together has been a good example of considerable cooperation.
  I wanted to bring that message to the Senate. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I know--I assume we are on the confirmation 
of Sharon Coleman?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. LEAHY. First, I am going to speak a little bit about the process 
of her nomination through the committee. The distinguished Presiding 
Officer would know about this because he has had probably the best 
attendance of anybody, including the chairman, on the Senate Judiciary 
Committee, and he has handled a number of these nominations.
  We are going to proceed today on only 1 of the 22 judicial 
nominations that have been stalled on the Senate floor by Republican 
obstruction. This is a nominee we considered and voted out of the 
Judiciary Committee unanimously 3 months ago without objection.
  Just so everybody will understand, even after being nominated to 
serve on a court, these well-qualified nominees have to put their lives 
on hold. We have the hearing, they go through the committee 
unanimously, but then they wait and wait on the Senate floor. If the 
nominee is practicing law they cannot take on new clients. If they are 
with a law firm, they have a hard time taking new cases as the law firm 
needs to avoid any conflict of interest.
  I cannot understand why this obstruction is happening. I have never 
seen anything like this in my 36 years in the Senate. No Republican 
Senator on the Judiciary Committee voted against this nomination. There 
are another dozen judicial nominations on the Senate's Executive 
Calendar that were reported by the Judiciary Committee without 
objection, but they remain stalled by a Republican refusal to consent 
to final Senate action.
  I tell people in my home State of Vermont I am sent here to vote yes 
or no, not to vote maybe. It seems to me everybody wants to vote maybe. 
There is no good reason each of these pending nominations could not be 
confirmed immediately. With so many nominations, despite ongoing 
vacancies and the need in the Northern District of Illinois for this 
judge, 3 months have passed without any explanation.
  I predict that when we have the rollcall on this nomination it will 
be confirmed with virtually no opposition, which makes it even more 
tragic. Also, it hurts the Federal judiciary. It hurts the credibility 
of the Federal judiciary. But I might say, especially on something like 
this, where the Senate Republican leadership would not even consent to 
a vote on the nomination until today, this certainly hurts the image of 
the Senate. People cannot understand why, when we have something on 
which everybody agrees, why it cannot come to a vote.
  We have the Senate Republican leadership refusing to enter into time 
agreements on pending judicial nominations that have the support from 
both Democrats and Republicans, including nominations with bipartisan 
support from North Carolina and Tennessee and South Carolina and 
California and New York and Delaware and Virginia and Utah, Maryland, 
Minnesota, and Rhode Island. Every single Democrat is prepared to vote 
on these nominations. They could vote on them tonight and are prepared 
to vote now. However, they continue to be held up by Republicans.
  So I tell the people of North Carolina and Tennessee, South Carolina 
and California and New York and Delaware and Virginia and Utah and 
Maryland and Minnesota and Rhode Island, if you are wondering where 
your judges are, they are being held up not by the Democrats but by the 
Republicans.
  In fact, the Senate is dramatically behind the pace I set for 
President Bush's judicial nominees in 2001 and 2002. In 2002, the 
second year of the Bush administration, the Democratic Senate 
majority's hard work led to the confirmation of 72 Federal circuit and 
district judges nominated by a President from the other party. In this 
second year of the Obama administration, we have confirmed just 23 so 
far--72 for President Bush, 23 for President Obama.
  In the first 2 years of the Bush administration, we confirmed 100 
Federal circuit and district court judges. So far, in the first 2 years 
of the Obama administration, the Republican leadership has successfully 
blocked all but 35 of President Obama's Federal circuit and district 
court nominees--100 to 35.
  Playing games with the Federal judiciary hurts everybody. During the 
first 2 years of President Bush's Presidency, I had the opportunity to 
serve for 17 months of as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I 
knew we had just come from a time where Republicans had pocket-
filibustered 61 of President Clinton's nominees to the judiciary. I 
said we ought to try stopping that, so in those 17 months that I had 
the privilege to serve as chairman, I convinced the people in my caucus 
and others and we confirmed 100 of President Bush's nominees.
  I mention this because in the first 48 months of President Bush's 
Presidency, actually barely half of that time, 17 months of that 48 
months, there were Democrats in charge. For 31 months of this time 
there were Republicans in charge. During the 17 months that the

[[Page S5734]]

Democrats were in charge, we confirmed 100 of President Bush's 
nominees. During the 31 months the Republicans were in charge I think 
they confirmed around the same number. So we showed our good faith, 
even though we had seen 61 of the Democratic President's nominees 
pocket-filibustered.
  At this date in President Clinton's second year in office the Senate 
had confirmed 72 of his Federal circuit and district court nominees. At 
this date in President Bush's second year in office, 57. Of course, we 
confirmed 100 in all by the end of the year.
  Federal judicial vacancies around the country continue to hover 
around 100. Of these, 43 vacancies have been declared by the 
nonpartisan Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to be judicial 
emergencies. I cannot remember a time when we have had 43 judicial 
emergencies.
  Sharon Coleman has been nominated to fill one of them, but we have 
had to wait 3 months just to get to a vote on her. Ten nominations to 
fill other judicial emergency vacancies have been reported out of the 
Senate Judiciary Committee, and they remain stalled in the Senate. Last 
year, when Senate Republicans blocked President Obama's nominees, we 
confirmed the fewest judges in 50 years, the fewest judges from any 
President, Republican or Democratic, in 50 years.
  Speaking of another nominee, I said to President Obama when he asked 
why they were blocking everything he tried to do, I said: If you had 
nominated Moses the Lawgiver, there would be some who would try to 
block the nomination. In fact, I said, at least somebody would say: 
Well, he can't produce a birth certificate.
  This is playing games with the Federal judiciary. I don't know what 
the benefits are. It certainly does not make the Senate look good. When 
you think the Senate Republican leadership last year allowed only 12 
Federal circuit and district court nominees to be considered and 
confirmed, despite the availability of many more for final action--that 
is wrong. They have continued their obstruction throughout this year. 
By every measure, this Republican obstructionism of our Federal 
judiciary is a disaster for the Federal courts and the American people. 
But the good thing is Sharon Coleman is going to be confirmed today. 
After these unnecessary delays, she will be confirmed, and I 
congratulate Sharon Coleman and her family on her confirmation.
  She is currently a justice on the Illinois Appellate Court of 
Chicago, having served previously as a judge on the Circuit Court of 
Cook County, IL, as Deputy State's Attorney and Bureau Chief for the 
Public Interest Bureau of the Cook County State's Attorney's Office, as 
an assistant U.S. attorney in the Northern District of Illinois, and as 
an assistant State's attorney in Cook County.
  The American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal 
Judiciary unanimously rated Justice Coleman ``well qualified.'' That is 
the highest possible rating they could give her.
  After she is confirmed, and she will be, there will be still 21 
judicial nominations favorably reported by the Judiciary Committee that 
have been stalled from Senate consideration by the Senate Republican 
leadership. For many months I have urged the Republican leader to work 
with the majority leader to schedule immediate votes on consensus 
nominees. Going forward, we will have many who will be confirmed by our 
committee unanimously. We ought to get them to the Senate floor and 
vote on them. The Senate needs to be making better progress considering 
the many pending judicial nomination awaiting final Senate action.
  I see the distinguished Senator from Illinois. I assume he wishes to 
speak, and I will yield the floor to him.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. BURRIS. I thank the Senator from Vermont, the chairman. I thank 
him for the wonderful job he has done trying to move our judges along. 
I agree with the Senator, the fact we have to go to a vote on this 
distinguished nominee; it should be done by unanimous consent, and we 
should not have had to take up this time. But if that is the will of 
the body, then so be it.
  Mr. President, I rise this evening in strong support of Judge Sharon 
Johnson Coleman, a proud resident of my home State of Illinois and of 
course a fellow Chicago south-sider. We are very proud of which side 
she comes from in Chicago, west side or south side. Few appear from the 
north side. We don't have a deal with the east side because that is 
Lake Michigan. We are proud of that.
  She received her law degree from Washington University in St. Louis, 
and she has served as an assistant State's attorney, deputy State's 
attorney, and assistant U.S. attorney. She quickly proved she knew her 
way around the courtroom and could be very successful in the cases she 
tried.
  From 1996 to 2008, she served as a circuit court judge in Cook 
County. She displayed a thorough understanding of the law and a fair 
temperament that marked her as a model jurist.
  She was assigned to the Child Protective Division for 2\1/2\ years 
and was a jury trial judge in the law division for almost a decade.
  In 2008, Judge Coleman was elected to the Illinois Appellate Court. 
She has served there ever since and is doing a tremendous job in her 
deliberations.
  I am proud to support her nomination to become a district judge for 
the Northern District of Illinois. We are short of judges in that 
district. The caseloads are heavy, and we can stand to have a few more 
of those nominees confirmed by this body.
  Judge Coleman is an excellent jurist, and I place my full confidence 
in her as President Obama's nominee for this post. She has been 
supported by all of our bar associations. She has won numerous awards 
and received recognition in her career. She has been a tremendous 
member of the bar and of the judiciary.
  I am asking my colleagues to join me in supporting her in this 
confirmation. I agree with my chairman. These judges should be 
confirmed so we can move on with some other important business of this 
body.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the 
nomination.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  Under the previous order, the question is, Will the Senate advise and 
consent to the nomination of Sharon Johnson Coleman, of Illinois, to be 
United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois?
  The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Begich), the 
Senator from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand), the Senator from North 
Carolina (Mrs. Hagan), the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Kohl), the 
Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), the Senator from Maryland (Ms. 
Mikulski), and the Senator from New Hampshire (Mrs. Shaheen) are 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Kansas (Mr. Brownback), the Senator from Florida (Mr. LeMieux), 
the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. 
Roberts), the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions), and the Senator from 
Louisiana (Mr. Vitter).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Udall of New Mexico). Are there any other 
Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 86, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 205 Ex.]

                                YEAS--86

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennet
     Bennett
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Brown (MA)
     Brown (OH)
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burris
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Johnson
     Kaufman
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kyl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lugar
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Schumer

[[Page S5735]]


     Shelby
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Thune
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Begich
     Brownback
     Gillibrand
     Hagan
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     LeMieux
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Roberts
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Vitter
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to 
reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table. The President 
will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

                          ____________________