[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 36 (Thursday, March 10, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1537-S1541]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                           Belarus Resolution

  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of a 
bipartisan resolution that has been submitted by our colleague, Senator 
Durbin, and of which I am proud to be a cosponsor, which concerns the 
situation in the country of Belarus.
  As the winds of democratic change have been sweeping now across North 
Africa and the Middle East ousting autocratic rulers who have been long 
entrenched there, it is important for us to remember there is still one 
remaining dictatorship in Europe, and that is in the country of 
Belarus.
  In the 20 years since the fall of the Soviet Union, Belarus's 
neighbors to the north and west have become successful, prosperous 
democracies. But, tragically, while Poland, Lithuania, and Latvia have 
broken the chains of tyranny and joined the flagship institutions of 
the Euro-Atlantic world, NATO, and the European Union, Belarus and its 
people have been left behind--held back by its despot ruler Alexander 
Lukashenko, who has ruled his country through repression and rigged 
elections for nearly two decades.
  Some in the United States and Europe had hoped in recent years that 
Lukashenko might be prepared to open up Belarus and change his ways. 
These hopes, however, came to an abrupt end on December 19 of last year 
when Belarus held Presidential elections. As it quickly became clear 
that the votes in those elections were neither free nor fair, thousands 
of Belarusian people took to the streets of Minsk in protest, and the 
Lukashenko regime responded with violence and brutality.
  This resolution would put the Senate on record in response to the 
crackdown launched in Belarus on December 19--a crackdown, I add, that 
continues in significant ways to this day.
  More than 600 people were swept up by Belarusian security forces on 
election day and its immediate aftermath--among them journalists, civil 
society representatives, political activists, and several opposition 
Presidential candidates. It is hard to believe this kind of behavior 
still exists in this world today. The detained continue to be denied 
access to family, lawyers, medical treatment, and open legal 
proceedings, while their relatives and attorneys endure harassment by 
Lukashenko's security forces.
  This resolution will do several significant things. First, it will 
send a strong and clear message to Lukashenko that his actions are 
unacceptable and will carry significant costs. It tells him we do not 
consider the December 19 election to be legitimate and that he is, 
therefore, not the legitimately elected leader of Belarus, and that 
there should be new elections that are free, fair, and meet 
international standards. I would add that the European Parliament 
passed a resolution not long ago that says precisely the same thing 
that I have just said here in the Senate.

  Perhaps even more important, this resolution will send a message to 
the people of Belarus who were struggling to secure their fundamental 
freedoms.

[[Page S1540]]

It tells the dissidents there that we have not and will not forget them 
or their cause; that we remember their names, in fact, and we will 
stand in solidarity with them until they achieve their goal, which is a 
free and democratic Belarus.
  Last month, Senator McCain and I and others traveled to Vilnius, 
Lithuania, where we met with Belarusian students and opposition 
military leaders. This was an extremely powerful experience for all of 
us. We heard directly from them about the repression taking place in 
their home country. The substance of the resolution Senator Durbin has 
written and submitted, with cosponsorship by several of us, reflects 
what the Belarusians we met with in Vilnius told us, as well as what we 
heard here in Washington from other dissidents from that country.
  The resolution specifically calls for the immediate and unconditional 
release of all political prisoners in Belarus. It also urges a 
tightening of the sanctions against Lukashenko, and we are urging the 
Obama administration to offer the strongest possible material and 
technical support for Belarusian civil society, and that includes, of 
course, the political opposition.
  This resolution is broadly bipartisan in its sponsorship and reflects 
what I think is a wide consensus in the Senate about the situation in 
Belarus today. I know there are some who may look at the resolution and 
say it is merely symbolic, who say there is nothing we can do to help 
the people who are living such repressed and unfree lives in Belarus, 
and that we should simply accept the reality of Lukashenko's 
dictatorship after all these years. But if the historic events in 
Tunisia and Egypt have taught us anything about our foreign policies, 
it is that the United States does best when we stand with our values 
and with the people who share them--and that what appear to be even the 
most impregnable regimes can fall with remarkable speed.
  Obviously, I cannot say exactly when Belarus will be free, but I have 
no doubt that someday it will be free. I am confident the future of 
Belarus belongs not to Lukashenko and his cronies but to the people of 
that great country--to the dissidents who are in jail, to the students 
we met in Vilnius last month, to the civil society activists who are 
being harassed by the KGB as we speak. It belongs to the people in 
Belarus who want a future of democracy and economic opportunity, not 
Soviet-style repression.
  This resolution--put together, again I say with thanks, by Senator 
Durbin--puts the Senate on the side of the people of Belarus and 
against the Lukashenko regime that is oppressing them. I hope we can 
come together and swiftly pass this bipartisan measure.
  I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor to the Senator from Iowa.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, soon we will be voting on another 
nominee for district court. We continue our rapid pace in which the 
Senate has been confirming President Obama's judicial nominees. This 
vote will mark the 11th judicial nominee to be confirmed this Congress. 
That is more than double the number confirmed in the 108th Congress, 
which only saw five confirmations at this point. Obviously, actions 
speak louder than words. So far, our actions have had concrete results.
  The Judiciary Committee met this morning and reported six more 
judicial nominees. That puts the total at 22 nominees reported 
favorably so far. We continue to hold hearings every 2 weeks and have 
heard from 31 nominees currently pending before the Senate. As I have 
said in the past, we will continue to move consensus nominees through 
the confirmation process. However, we will continue to do our due 
diligence in evaluating the nominees. What we will not do is put 
quantity confirmed over quality confirmed. These lifetime appointments 
are too important to the Federal Judiciary and the American people to 
allow rubberstamping.
  Just this past Monday, the Senate confirmed three district court 
judges. In his statement for the record, the chairman of the committee, 
Senator Leahy, stated:

       Nearly one out of every eight Federal judgeships is vacant. 
     This puts at serious risk the ability of all Americans to 
     have a fair hearing in court.

  However, what the chairman neglected to mention is the fact that 
President Obama has not put forth a nominee for every vacancy the court 
currently faces. In fact, of the 95 judicial vacancies, the Senate only 
has 45 nominees. That is 53 percent of vacancies without a nominee from 
the White House.
  Today, we vote on a nominee to sit on the Western District of North 
Carolina court. While this is an important vacancy, and a vacancy we 
need to fill, it is not a judicial emergency. However, there is a 
judicial emergency in the Eastern District of North Carolina. That 
seat, which has been vacant since 2005, does not have a nominee 
currently pending. President Bush nominated Thomas Alvin Farr to that 
seat twice, but he was never afforded a hearing, let alone an up-or-
down vote. I am happy this side of the aisle is not repeating the same 
regrettable treatment Mr. Farr received.
  With regard to Mr. Cogburn, the nominee we will be voting on, the 
American Bar Association has rated him ``majority well qualified, 
minority qualified.'' He received his B.A. from the University of North 
Carolina at Chapel Hill and his juris doctorate from Cumberland School 
of Law. Mr. Cogburn has practiced law in many capacities. Through his 
work in private practice, he has worked on a wide range of issues, 
including criminal litigation, personal injury, civil litigation, and a 
significant amount of mediation.
  As an assistant U.S. attorney for over a decade, Mr. Cogburn gained 
substantial appellate experience. While there, he also served as drug 
task force attorney and chief assistant U.S. attorney. Mr. Cogburn also 
holds judicial experience. He was appointed to serve an 8-year term as 
a U.S. magistrate judge by the U.S. District Court for the Western 
District of North Carolina.
  After careful evaluation, the Judiciary Committee reported this fine 
nominee by voice vote on February 3, 2011. I congratulate Mr. Cogburn 
and his family on this important lifetime appointment and his 
willingness to continue in public service.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant editor of the Daily Digest proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. McCaskill). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that all time be 
yielded back in order to start the voting.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. ENSIGN. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  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 Max Oliver Cogburn, Jr., of North Carolina, to be United States 
District Judge for the Western District of North Carolina?
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant editor of the Daily Digest called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer) 
and the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Udall) are necessarily absent.
  Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Texas (Mrs. Hutchison) and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 96, nays 0, as follows:

                       [Rollcall Vote No. 38 Ex.]

                                YEAS--96

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Barrasso
     Baucus
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bingaman
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Brown (MA)
     Brown (OH)
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Chambliss
     Coats
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Coons
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Durbin
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagan
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hoeven
     Inouye

[[Page S1541]]


     Isakson
     Johanns
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson (WI)
     Kerry
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Lee
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lugar
     Manchin
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Paul
     Portman
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Rubio
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Thune
     Toomey
     Udall (CO)
     Vitter
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Boxer
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Udall (NM)
  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 
shall be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

                          ____________________