[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 69 (Wednesday, May 18, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3088-S3093]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                             Energy Policy

  Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, over the past couple of days here on the 
Senate floor we have had a lot of discussion about domestic energy 
production and there have been a lot of good points made. But, frankly, 
it is more of a political exercise than something that is going to help 
the American people.
  If one listened to the debate, one might think there is no consensus 
and no way forward. I disagree with that. I think given our energy 
challenges, including $4 a gallon gasoline, we need an energy policy 
that encourages more affordable, reliable, and cleaner energy. I think 
we can reach a consensus on a few areas, and let me raise a couple of 
them today.
  The first is natural gas exploration and development. In my own State 
of Ohio, we have had exciting new developments over the past several 
years. Geologists have known we have big shale formations in the 
eastern part of the United States for years, but until recently we 
haven't had the drilling technologies that allowed us to tap into these 
huge reserves. We now have that.

  In Ohio, we have both the Marcellus and the Utica shale finds that, 
unfortunately, have not been tapped yet but have tremendous potential. 
Some of the oil and gas reserve estimates associated with these finds 
are truly amazing. For the State of Ohio alone, in one of those 
formations--Utica--I am told we could yield over 15 trillion cubic feet 
of natural gas. So this is a great opportunity both to be sure we have 
the energy we need to power our economy but also to create jobs that go 
into energy production.
  By the way, other States around us, including Pennsylvania, West 
Virginia, and upstate New York, as an example, have even more 
production potential than Ohio. Already there are some Ohio counties, 
such as Belmont County and Jefferson County and Columbiana County, that 
are beginning to explore some of these finds, and we are very hopeful 
that in some of these counties, where there is incredibly high 
unemployment, we will be able to begin production soon. These counties 
have been hard hit by the downturn in the economy, and they can use the 
economic activity and the jobs that will be created by this production.
  Earlier this year, I visited an Ohio company that is an example of 
one of the industries that is going to benefit from this natural gas 
production. It is V&M Star. It is a company that makes piping. It is 
near Youngstown, OH. They just decided to expand their manufacturing 
capability. Why? Because they are looking at Marcellus and Utica, 
understanding this is going to create great opportunities for them. 
They are investing in our State. They are investing in jobs. They are 
doing it because of these finds. We have to be sure we put out the 
Federal policies to promote and encourage the development of these 
resources.
  In addition to using natural gas for electricity generation and as a 
feedstock for a lot of industries, including the chemical industry, 
natural gas holds incredible potential as an alternative to gas. Today, 
we are talking about the need to be less dependent on foreign oil, 
which happens to be one of the top issues on both sides of the aisle. 
Natural gas is a way we can do that very directly because it can be 
used particularly in fleets. Today, the equivalent price for a gallon 
of natural gas is $1.60. Think about that: as compared to $4 for 
gasoline, $1.60 for natural gas. The infrastructure costs create some 
challenges, but, again, for fleets, where there is central refueling, 
it makes all the sense in the world. Widespread conversion of our 
fleets, including our Nation's buses, garbage trucks, and utility 
vehicles, would help reduce demand for gasoline.
  America arguably has the greatest energy reserves in the world, 
depending on which estimate you look at. We have to find a way to 
responsibly tap these reserves, in a way that we can become less 
dependent on foreign nations for energy needs, in a way where we will 
stop sending so much of our wealth overseas to pay for foreign imports, 
particularly of crude oil.
  Ohio is still in the throes of an economic downturn. Today, we are at 
9 percent unemployment in Ohio. Underemployment makes Ohio's situation 
even worse. One way to create jobs and to get Ohio back on track is by 
expanding, again, the use of our own resources, including natural gas. 
There should be a consensus on this issue. We should be promoting 
Federal policies to encourage the exploration and the development of 
these resources, and we should do it now.
  Another area where I think you could see some consensus on energy 
policy in the short term in the Senate is in the area of energy 
conservation and efficiency. We should both find more and use less. It 
is that commitment to use less that led me, last week, to introduce 
legislation with Senator Shaheen from New Hampshire called the Energy 
Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act. It is S. 1000, for those 
who would like to check it out.
  It is a bipartisan bill, a targeted and achievable piece of 
legislation that would leverage energy efficiency investments in a 
number of areas, including the building and industrial sectors but also 
with the Federal Government. It would help consumers and the Federal 
Government save money on their energy bills and help industry improve 
the efficiency of their production processes.
  Again, this is an example of where we should be able to come together 
as Republicans and Democrats to get something done. There is widespread 
consensus that energy efficiency is the low-hanging fruit, a way to 
reduce our energy use and, again, to make America's economy more 
competitive. As with anything, the devil is in the details. There will 
be some Senators who may disagree with some of the specifics in this 
legislation, but, again, it is the type of bill we should be debating 
on the floor of this Senate. With a little hard work, I believe it is 
one we can ultimately get enacted into law.
  Instead, again, we have spent the better part of this week debating 
two bills; one that, in my view, would have done more harm than good, 
by raising taxes on certain businesses, while doing nothing to increase 
energy production or lower gas prices; and another one I supported that 
I think would do a lot of good but we knew did not have the necessary 
60 votes to move forward and, therefore, we were not able to make 
progress this week for the American people.
  We have all the ingenuity, the know-how, and the resources within our 
own borders to be able to have the energy we need to run our economy 
and to improve our economy and to create jobs. I hope moving forward we 
can find agreement on these issues and begin to tap this great American 
potential.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  Mr. CARDIN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator withhold his suggestion?
  Mr. PORTMAN. I will.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. CARDIN. Thank you very much, Mr. President.
  I rise in strong support of the nomination of Goodwin Liu to be U.S. 
Circuit Judge for the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth 
Circuit. I urge my colleagues to invoke cloture on this nomination.
  I am disappointed we had to file a cloture motion. I hope my 
colleagues would want to vote up or down on this nomination, and I hope 
they would vote for his confirmation.
  As we begin the debate on the nomination of Mr. Liu, let me start by 
telling my colleagues how thoroughly his nomination has been vetted by 
the Judiciary Committee under the leadership of Chairman Leahy.
  President Obama first nominated Goodwin Liu for this position in 
February of last year. That was over 1 year

[[Page S3089]]

ago. The Judiciary Committee has held two separate hearings on this 
nomination. Mr. Liu's latest set of questions and answers, for the 
record, spanned over 130 pages. The Judiciary Committee has favorably 
reported his nomination on three separate occasions: in May of 2010, 
September of 2010, and April of 2011.
  So I am disappointed my Republican colleagues have refused to allow 
this nomination to come to a vote without the necessity of filing a 
cloture motion. As we know, the majority leader has filed cloture on 
this nomination. Senators have had ample information on the background, 
experience and qualifications of this nominee and it is time for the 
Senators to perform their constitutional duty to debate the nomination 
and to vote up or down on this nominee.
  I was privileged to serve on the Judiciary Committee in the 111th 
Congress and participated in a debate of the Goodwin Liu nomination on 
several occasions. I was pleased to cast my vote in favor of Mr. Liu's 
nomination in committee, and I look forward to supporting his 
nomination on the floor.
  When I examine judicial nominations that are submitted by the 
President, I use several criteria.
  First, I believe judicial nominees must have an appreciation for the 
Constitution and the protections it provides to each and every 
American.
  Second, a nominee must embrace a judicial philosophy that reflects 
mainstream American values, not narrow ideological interests.
  Third, a judicial nominee must respect the role and responsibilities 
of each branch of government, including a healthy respect for the 
precedents of the court.
  Fourth, I look for nominees with a strong commitment and passion for 
the continued forward progress of civil rights protections.
  Finally, I want a judge who has the necessary experience, 
temperament, and commitment to public service.
  I wish to share with my colleagues a little background on Mr. Liu, 
his qualifications, and why I intend to support his nomination.
  Goodwin Liu, in many ways, embodies the American dream. He is the son 
of immigrants to this country. His parents were doctors who came to the 
United States from Taiwan in the late 1960s, when foreign doctors were 
being recruited to work in underserved areas.
  Goodwin Liu did not speak English until kindergarten. During high 
school, Goodwin Liu had the opportunity to serve as a page in the House 
of Representatives, after being sponsored by late Congressman Bob 
Matsui of California, whom I had the privilege of serving with in the 
House of Representatives.
  Professor Liu has a sterling academic record. He earned his B.S., Phi 
Beta Kappa, from Stanford University, where he was elected copresident 
of the student body. A Rhodes Scholar, he earned his M.A. from Oxford 
University. He received his J.D. from Yale Law School, where he was an 
editor of the Yale Law Journal. He then went on to clerk for DC Circuit 
Court Judge David Tatel and Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
  Professor Liu has a track record of working on public policy issues 
in public service. He worked for 2 years at the Corporation for 
National Service. He served as a special assistant to the Deputy 
Secretary of Education, where he worked on numerous legal and policy 
issues.
  Professor Liu has worked in private practice. After his clerkships, 
he served as an associate in the Washington, DC, law firm of O'Melveny 
& Myers, working on a wide range of business matters. About half his 
practice consisted of appellate litigation, preparing him well to serve 
on a court of appeals. He has also maintained an active pro bono 
practice at that firm, which also tells me of his commitment to equal 
justice under the law.
  Professor Liu then went on to his current occupation, joining the 
faculty of the University of California Berkeley School of Law and 
helping to teach our next generation of lawyers. He serves as a 
professor at the law school, was promoted to an associate dean of the 
law school, and was elected to the American Law Institute.
  Professor Liu has received the law school's Distinguished Teaching 
Award. Professor Liu is considered an expert on constitutional law and 
education law and policy, with a particular focus on the needs of 
America's most disadvantaged students. He is the author of numerous law 
review articles and the coauthor of an influential book on 
constitutional law interpretation entitled ``Keeping Faith with the 
Constitution.''
  I heard my colleague talk about Goodwin Liu. But I would just urge my 
colleagues not to penalize an individual because he is active or 
expresses his own opinions. We should judge the nominees based upon 
their qualifications and their commitments to interpret the law as 
required on the court.
  Professor Liu answered numerous questions about his approach to 
constitutional interpretation during his two confirmation hearings. He 
testified:

       The role of the judge is to be an impartial, objective and 
     neutral arbiter of specific cases and controversies that come 
     before him or her, and the way that process works is through 
     absolute fidelity to the applicable precedents and the 
     language of the laws, statutes, or regulations that are at 
     issue in the case.

  I do not know who would disagree with that. That is what many of us 
have been calling for on both sides of the aisle.
  He has also answered questions about his ideology as a judge. He 
testified:

       It would not be my role to bring any particular theory of 
     constitutional interpretation to the job of an intermediate 
     appellate judge. The duty of a circuit judge is to faithfully 
     follow the Supreme Court's instructions on matters of 
     constitutional interpretation, not any particular theory. So 
     that is exactly what I would do. I would apply the applicable 
     precedents to the facts of each case.

  Once again, I could not agree with that statement more. In written 
responses to Senators' questions, he also stated:

       I do not believe it is ever appropriate for judges to 
     indulge their own values or policy preferences in determining 
     what the Constitution and laws mean.

  Professor Liu certainly has written a number of thought-provoking 
articles on controversial public policy issues of the day, but this 
should not disqualify him from being a judge. I am confident Professor 
Liu understands the difference between being an advocate and being a 
judge and I hope we can draw that distinction and will respect the 
difference if he is confirmed and puts on the judicial robe.
  Specific questions concerning affirmative action were asked during 
his confirmation hearings. So let me quote from Professor Liu's 
testimony to the Judiciary Committee:

       I absolutely do not support racial quotas, and my writings, 
     I think, have made very clear that I believe they are 
     unconstitutional.

  He then said:

       I think affirmative action, as it was originally conceived, 
     was a time-limited remedy for past wrongs, and I think that 
     is the appropriate way to understand what affirmative action 
     is.

  I think we should take a look at his record on this, and I think it 
is unfair to judge him based upon certain innuendoes.
  Professor Liu also has broad support from distinguished legal 
scholars from both parties. The former Solicitor General and White 
House prosecutor, Ken Starr, praised Professor Liu's ``strong 
intellect, demonstrated independence, and outstanding character''--
qualifications we all want to see on the court. We want to see 
intellect, we want to see independence, and we want to see character. 
Ken Starr summed that up fairly well.
  In a March 19, 2010, letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mr. 
Starr joined with another professor, stating:

       Goodwin is a person of great intellect, accomplishment, and 
     integrity, and he is exceptionally well qualified to serve on 
     the court of appeals. . . . What we wish to highlight, beyond 
     his on obvious intellect and legal talents, is his 
     independence and openness to diverse viewpoints, as well as 
     his ability to follow the facts and the law to their logical 
     conclusion. . . .
       These are qualities we expect in a judge. And Goodwin 
     clearly possesses them . . . [A] judge takes an oath to 
     uphold and defend the Constitution, and in the case of a 
     circuit judge, fidelity to the law entails adherence to 
     Supreme Court precedent and . . . adherence to circuit 
     precedence as well. . . . Goodwin knows the difference 
     between what the law is and what he might wish it to be, and 
     he is fully capable and unafraid of discharging the duty to 
     say what the law is.

  That is what Ken Starr said about a person he knows very well, 
Goodwin

[[Page S3090]]

Liu, and he strongly recommends his confirmation to our colleagues. I 
also want to discuss the importance of improving diversity on our 
courts. If confirmed, Professor Liu would be only the second Asian 
American currently serving on a Federal appeals court, and the only 
Asian American in active service in the Ninth Circuit.
  The Ninth Circuit is home to over 40 percent of the Asian American 
population in the United States. Finally, Professor Liu has received 
the highest possible judicial rating, ``unanimously well qualified'' 
from the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal 
Judiciary.
  With this distinguished record and recommendations that we have 
received, we have an excellent nominee to serve on the court of 
appeals. I urge my colleagues to vote for his confirmation.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, it is my privilege, it is my honor, to 
support Goodwin Liu, a Californian--and a brilliant Californian--who 
has been nominated by the President to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of 
Appeals. And what a fine nomination this is. I thank the President for 
his belief in Goodwin, and his, I think, amazing perception that this 
is a young man--and he is young, he is about 40. This is a young man 
who is just exceptional, is a perfect example of the American dream, 
and someone who has worked so hard to put himself into this position 
where he was nominated for this great honor.
  I want to show folks a picture of Goodwin. He is a very special and 
talented person. He has had a long struggle with this nomination, which 
we will talk about. I also wish to thank, of course, Chairman Leahy for 
working hard to bring this nomination to the Senate floor, and Senator 
Feinstein, my colleague, for her hard work in the committee and her 
leadership in helping to shepherd this nomination in the Senate.
  This vote is not only historic, because Goodwin will make history--if 
he gets this vote. This vote is long overdue. First, let me talk about 
why it is historic. It is historic because if we get the 51 votes we 
need today, Professor Liu will be one of only two Asian Americans 
currently serving as a Federal appellate judge in the United States. 
There is currently only one Asian American among the 160 active judges 
on the Federal Courts of Appeals, and there is no active Asian American 
judge on the Ninth Circuit, which has jurisdiction over an area that is 
home to more than 40 percent of our Nation's Asian American population.
  Let me repeat that. There is no active Asian American judge on the 
Ninth Circuit, which has jurisdiction over an area that is home to more 
than 40 percent of our Nation's Asian American population. The beauty 
of our great Nation--one of the beauties--is our great diversity. 
America is great because we are representatives of so many faiths and 
so many ethnic backgrounds. We know all of our institutions, whether it 
is here in the Senate or anywhere, all of our institutions do better 
when they have a diversity of views and diversity. Clearly, when 
someone as brilliant as Goodwin gets this nomination, we should be so 
proud in this body. We should be joining hands over party lines. We 
should be pleased that our court would have such a brilliant member.
  Professor Liu was originally nominated in February 2010 for a 
judicial emergency seat, one that has been vacant since January 2009. 
So we have had a judicial emergency, and yet we have had a hard time 
getting this vote to the floor.
  Chief Justice Roberts called on Senators not to play politics with 
our nominees. He warned that ``delays in filling vacancies have created 
acute difficulties in some judicial districts.'' Undoubtedly, the Ninth 
Circuit certainly is one of the jurisdictions that Chief Justice 
referred to because the Ninth Circuit is the Nation's largest and 
busiest appellate court in the country, accounting for over 20 percent 
of all new appellate cases in the country, according to court 
statistics.
  Now, I have said--and I heard Senator Cardin, and I thought he just 
did a beautiful job of laying out why he is supporting Goodwin Liu. But 
I also heard some other comments that did not connect to Goodwin Liu. I 
heard comments that just did not fit what Goodwin Liu has said about 
his role as a judge.
  So I wanted to put up a couple of the quotes directly from Professor 
Liu and what he said about his role as a judge. He said:

       I think the role of the judge is to be an impartial, 
     objective, and neutral arbiter of specific cases and 
     controversies that come before him or her. And the way that 
     that process works is through absolute fidelity to the 
     applicable precedents and the language of the laws, statues, 
     regulations that are at issue in the case.

  Another statement by Professor Liu I wanted to share with you. He 
said:

       If I were fortunate enough to be confirmed in this process, 
     it would not be my role to bring any particular theory of 
     constitutional interpretation to the job of an intermediate 
     appellate judge. The duty of a circuit judge is to faithfully 
     follow the Supreme Court's instructions on matters of 
     Constitutional interpretation, not any particular theory. And 
     so that is exactly what I would do, is I would apply the 
     applicable precedents to the facts of each case.

  It could not be clearer. So if you hear any colleague of mine saying 
something else about how Professor Liu views the role of a judge in 
this particular appellate area, just refer them to these quotes.
  Professor Liu has sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee twice for 
more than 5 hours--5 hours--answering any and all questions posed to 
him during the hearing. He has also answered numerous written questions 
from committee members. He has been voted out of the Judiciary 
Committee three times.
  I just ask the American people, as they tune in to this debate--they 
may not be familiar with the confirmation process--if they think it is 
fair for someone like Professor Liu--and we will put his picture back 
up so we personalize this--this young man, this husband, this father, 
this teacher, to have to sit for all of those hours, and then to 
finally be brought to the floor, after the third time we voted it--that 
is why I praised Senator Leahy for doing this again because sometimes 
there are reasons that we go back and back and back. There are reasons 
of fairness and justice and because we do not want to miss an 
opportunity to put someone like Professor Goodwin Liu on the bench.
  Now, I will tell you, there have been 12 months of attacks on Goodwin 
Liu, misrepresentations, unfounded distortions of his record. I want 
the American people to know this. Politics is tough. I can tell you, 
running four times for Senate, it is tough. It is brutal. It is ugly. 
But there is no reason to turn that venom on a nominee like this, and 
it is offensive to me.
  Through it all, Professor Liu could have said: You know what, I 
cannot take this. I do not need this. My kids do not need this. My 
family does not need this. But he showed courage and character and 
dignity.
  I was so pleased when President Obama nominated Goodwin Liu to serve 
on the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals because Goodwin Liu is 
considered one of the brightest legal scholars not just in California 
but in the Nation. He is a respected authority on constitutional law.
  At UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of law, where he is an associate 
dean and a professor, he is admired widely for his writings and his 
devotion to his students.
  To Professor Liu, if you are watching these proceedings, I am proud 
of you. To Professor Liu's wife, Ann, and his two small children, 
Violet and Emmett, I say thank you for your patience and your 
unyielding support. You should be so proud of your dad.
  Let me tell you a little bit about Goodwin Liu's background. He was 
born in Augusta, GA, the son of Taiwanese immigrants who came to this 
country to practice medicine in underserved areas.
  In 1977, they moved to Sacramento, where his parents were primary 
care physicians for over 20 years. In Goodwin, his parents instilled 
both perseverance and a strong work ethic, even leaving math problems 
on the kitchen

[[Page S3091]]

table every day of the summer to supplement his school work. As a high 
school student, he pulled all-nighters studying the dictionary to 
expand his vocabulary and raise his SAT scores. His hard work paid off, 
propelling him to Stanford University, where he graduated Phi Beta 
Kappa, and then to Oxford University, where he was a Rhodes scholar.
  I say to my colleagues on the other side, who often say it ought to 
be the results of your life that count, it ought to be your record that 
counts, it ought to be your qualifications that count--Stanford 
University, Phi Beta Kappa, Oxford University Rhodes scholar.
  Liu's experience at Stanford and Oxford in student government, as a 
summer school teacher for low-income youth, codirecting a K-12 youth 
education conference, and studying philosophy encouraged him to pursue 
the law and public service. In fact, Liu spent the next 2 years at the 
Corporation for National Service helping to launch the groundbreaking 
AmeriCorps program. He led the agency's effort to build community 
service programs at colleges and universities throughout the country, 
and he traveled to over 30 States to encourage service among students.
  The spark of public service and the law clearly ignited, Liu then 
went on to attend Yale Law School. His stellar record of achievements 
continued at Yale, where Liu, along with a classmate, won the prize for 
the best team argument in the moot court competition. Several of his 
papers won awards, and he earned prestigious clerkships on both the 
court of appeals and the Supreme Court.
  What more does anyone want from a nominee? I can't even imagine, 
frankly, even matching this.
  In between the clerkships, Liu again chose public service, working at 
the U.S. Department of Education, helping to implement a congressional 
appropriation to help turn around low-performing schools. Former South 
Carolina Governor Richard Riley, who was Secretary of Education at the 
time, called Liu a `` `go-to' person''--in his words--``for important 
projects and complex issues because of Liu's ability to see the big 
picture while also mastering the details of legal and policy 
problems.'' What else do you want in a judge? He has an ``ability to 
see the big picture while also mastering the details of legal and 
policy problems.'' That is a quote from former South Carolina Governor 
Richard Riley.
  After completing his Supreme Court clerkship, Liu joined the 
litigation practice at O'Melveny & Myers, working on a wide range of 
business matters while maintaining an active pro bono practice. So you 
have a person who worked in government, private practice, and in 
education. He earned high praise from his peers, including Walter 
Dellinger, chair of O'Melveny's appellate practice, who said Liu was 
``widely respected in law practice for his superb legal ability, his 
sound judgment and warm collegiality.''
  Then Liu joined the faculty at UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law 
in 2003 and quickly established himself as an outstanding teacher as 
well as a constitutional law and education law and policy expert.
  Think about this. This is a young life, with all these experiences, 
including raising a family.
  In the classroom, Liu is popular and well regarded. His introductory 
constitutional law course is consistently one of the most 
oversubscribed at Boalt. They want to hear him. They want to be in his 
presence to understand how the Constitution works and why this country 
is so special. In 2009, Liu received UC Berkeley's Distinguished 
Teaching Award, the university's most prestigious teaching excellence 
award, and was selected by that year's graduating class to be 
commencement speaker.
  Students often remark on Liu's efforts to illustrate the impact of 
the law on everyday life. As anyone who has taken his con law class 
knows, to demonstrate that principle, Liu uses a wedding photo that 
shows him and his new bride, Ann O'Leary, the Irish American daughter 
of a social worker and union leader from Orono, ME. The two married in 
Virginia, a State that restricted interracial marriages until the 
Supreme Court invalidated the provision in the landmark 1967 case 
Loving v. Virginia.
  Berkeley Law School Dean Christopher Edley describes Professor Liu 
this way:

       Goodwin Liu is an outstanding teacher, a brilliant scholar, 
     and an exceptional public servant.

  Professor Liu is widely respected and has tremendous support across 
the legal spectrum and from both sides of the political aisle.
  I want to read what Ken Starr said about Goodwin Liu. Remember Ken 
Starr, the former Whitewater prosecutor? This is what he said. He wrote 
this with Professor Amar in an op-ed piece that ran:

       In our view, the traits that should weigh most heavily in 
     the evaluation of an extraordinarily qualified nominee, such 
     as Goodwin, are professional integrity and the ability to 
     discharge faithfully an abiding duty to follow the law. 
     Because Goodwin possesses those qualities to the highest 
     degree, we are confident that he will serve on the Court of 
     Appeals not only fairly and competently, but with great 
     distinction. We support and urge his speedy confirmation.

  I point out to my Republican friends that Ken Starr is one of your 
heroes. Come on, listen to what he says about Goodwin Liu. Don't come 
to the floor and say things about Goodwin that aren't so. Please come 
to your senses about Goodwin Liu.
  There is another supporter I want to talk about too. This is former 
Bush administration counsel, Richard Painter:

       I have done my share of vetting judicial candidates and 
     fighting the confirmation wars. I didn't know much about Liu 
     before his nomination, but I became intrigued by the 
     attention the nomination generated, and I wondered if his 
     Republican critics were deploying the same tactics Democrats 
     used to attack Republican nominees. They were. If anything, 
     the attacks on Liu have been even more unfair. Based on my 
     own review of his record, I believe it is not even a close 
     question that Liu is an outstanding nominee whose views fall 
     well within the legal mainstream.

  That conclusion is shared by leading conservatives who are familiar 
with Liu's record. We even have a quote from Clint Bolick of the 
Goldwater Institute, one of the most conservative institutes. They 
endorsed Liu. This is what they said:

       Because of his fresh, independent thinking and intellectual 
     honesty, as well as scholarly credentials and experience, he 
     will serve with distinction on this important court.

  If that is not enough for my Republican friends, I have some more. I 
have former Republican Congressman Bob Barr. He offered praise of 
Professor Liu's ``commitment to the Constitution and to a fair criminal 
justice system.'' Barr also noted that ``[Liu's] views are shared by 
many scholars, lawyers and public officials from across the ideological 
spectrum.''
  Tom Campbell of California, a former Republican Congressman--someone 
who actually attempted to run against me a couple of times for the 
Senate--wrote that ``Goodwin will bring scholarly distinction and a 
strong reputation for integrity, fair-mindedness, and collegiality to 
the Ninth Circuit.'' Reflecting on Liu's many years of work in serving 
the public interest, Campbell also said, ``I am not surprised that 
[Liu] has again been called to public service.''
  Yes, he has been called and nominated, but he won't be able to 
continue his extraordinary work unless we get 51 votes here. I know 
there is some letter that is circulating that attacks Goodwin Liu 
again. I hope my colleagues will read not just what I am saying but 
what leading Republicans are saying about how talented Goodwin Liu is. 
Every single thing the man has done has turned to gold--every single 
thing he has done. He is best at everything he does. Why would we lose 
this opportunity for the American people to have him serve them in this 
important capacity? I ask that rhetorically. I cannot imagine why 
anybody would vote no.
  Here is another one. Professor Liu has even drawn praise from Brian 
Jones, who served as General Counsel at the Department of Education 
after Liu's tenure there. This is what Brian Jones, the General Counsel 
at the Department of Education, said:

       During [2001 abd 2002], and even after he became a law 
     professor in 2003, [Goodwin] volunteered his time and 
     expertise on several occasions to help me and my staff sort 
     through legal issues he worked on during the previous 
     administration. In those interactions, Goodwin's efforts were 
     models of bipartisan cooperation. He brought useful knowledge 
     and careful lawyerly perspectives that helped our 
     administration to achieve its goals.
       But I am convinced, based on his record and my own 
     experiences with him, that he is

[[Page S3092]]

     thoughtful, fair-minded and well qualified to be an appellate 
     judge.

  I don't know why the Republicans filibustered this nomination. I 
don't know why they filibustered this. I don't understand it.
  Let's look at some of the organizations that back Goodwin. Of course, 
those in the Asian American community are so proud, as they should be 
and as I am, because Goodwin is a Californian by choice.
  In an op-ed published just today, former Secretary Norm Mineta, the 
first Asian Pacific American member of a President's Cabinet; that is, 
the Bush Cabinet, wrote that ``Professor Liu is an extremely well-
qualified nominee who has the intellectual capacity, experience, 
temperament and integrity to be an excellent jurist.'' Mineta went on 
to warn that ``if Liu is not confirmed, Asian Pacific Americans may be 
left with the impression that there continues to be a glass ceiling 
blocking Asian Pacific Americans from top-level leadership positions 
regardless of their qualifications.''
  Again, Norm Mineta--and anybody who knows Norm knows what a wonderful 
human being he is. George W. Bush chose Norm Mineta, who is a Democrat, 
to be the Secretary of Transportation. Norm Mineta says that because 
Professor Liu is so qualified and has so much intellectual capacity, 
such great experience, such great temperament, and so much integrity, 
he warns that ``if Liu is not confirmed, Asian Pacific Americans may be 
left with the impression that there continues to be a glass ceiling 
blocking Asian Pacific Americans from top-level leadership positions 
regardless of their qualifications.''
  We also have a quote from the Committee of 100, a national nonprofit, 
nonpartisan membership organization that addresses issues concerning 
Sino-U.S. relations affecting the Chinese American community. They 
wrote that ``[Liu's] ascension to the bench would signal that talented 
people of all backgrounds are integral to our justice system.''
  What we do here matters. It matters whom we send to these important 
positions. We have someone here who will break down barriers, but, do 
you know what, that would not be enough. He has to be great, he has to 
be outstanding, and he is all those things. Yet we are very nervous 
about getting 51 votes. We are very nervous that politics is being 
played. We don't know what is going to happen at the end of the day. 
That is why I am taking this time, because I want my colleagues to know 
that if they cast an ``aye'' vote, it should bring a smile to their 
faces, and they should feel good in their hearts and their minds that 
they are doing the right thing.
  Twenty-five prominent Asian-Pacific Americans who serve as general 
counsel to Fortune 1000 companies and other large companies wrote:

       Professor Liu has earned praise from conservatives and 
     progressives alike for his sense of fairness, open-
     mindedness, and integrity. His intellect and qualifications 
     are beyond dispute. Indeed, Professor Liu has been rated 
     unanimously ``well-qualified'' by the American Bar 
     Association.

  They go on:

       It is worth noting that Professor Liu, if confirmed, would 
     become the only Asian Pacific American active appellate court 
     judge in the Ninth Circuit, and only the second Asian Pacific 
     American active appellate court judge nationwide. Especially 
     given the large number of Asian Pacific Americans in 
     California, Hawaii, and other states, covered by the Ninth 
     Circuit--

  And I said before I think it is 40 percent of Asian Americans who 
live in this particular area that the court covers--

       the lack of an Asian Pacific American judge in this circuit 
     is striking. We feel that Professor Liu would serve our 
     country well and with distinction.

  Professor Liu has drawn law enforcement support, including the 
California Correctional Peace Officers Association, as well as the 
National Asian Peace Officers Association, which noted that Professor 
Liu has ``earned the respect of [its] members and the large audience of 
the law enforcement community.''
  David Lum, the president of National Asian Peace Officers 
Association, went on to compliment Liu as ``a person of integrity, 
dedication, passion, enthusiasm, and law and order.''
  Liu has also received support from the business community, including 
from the prominent business executives with whom Liu served on the 
Stanford University board of trustees. In a letter of support, Liu's 
fellow trustees wrote the following:

       Across a wide range of complex issues, Goodwin routinely 
     asks thoughtful and incisive questions. He is good at 
     thinking independently and zeroing in on important issues 
     that need attention. Even in a room full of highly 
     accomplished leaders, Goodwin is impressive. He is 
     insightful, constructive, and a good listener. Moreover, he 
     possesses a remarkably even temperament; his demeanor is 
     unfailingly respectful and open-minded, never dogmatic or 
     inflexible. Given these qualities, it was no surprise that he 
     was asked to chair the board's Special Committee on 
     Investment Responsibility after serving just one year of his 
     five-year term.

  Again and again, there is a thread running through this man's life at 
40. That is how old he is, 40--40 years old. Everything this man has 
done, this young man has been unbelievably--I want to say unimaginable 
at his age that he has done all he has done.
  They continue:

       In short, Goodwin's strengths are exactly what we expect in 
     a judge: objectivity, independence, collegiality--

  This is what the Stanford trustees say--

     respect for differing views, sound judgment. Goodwin 
     possesses these qualities on top of the brilliant legal 
     acumen that is well-established by his professional record 
     and the judgment of those most familiar with his scholarly 
     work.

  It goes on and on.
  The President of Stanford University, along with two presidents 
emeritus, wrote to endorse Liu's nomination. They said that Liu ``has 
epitomized the goal of Stanford's founders, which was to promote the 
public welfare by exercising an influence on behalf of humanity and 
civilization, teaching the blessings of liberty regulated by law, and 
inculcating love and reverence for the great principles of government 
as derived from the inalienable rights of man to life, liberty and the 
pursuit of happiness.''
  This eloquence that is coming out of people's mouths about Goodwin--
honestly, I have stood here many times, and I have spoken on behalf of 
many nominees. I honestly have not had a situation where the eloquence 
and passion of the supporters has come through as it has for this young 
man. He is a blessing, honestly. I feel at this moment we need to back 
him--all of us--and bring this country together around someone who 
epitomizes the American dream.
  I want to speak about, as I wind down, newspapers across the country 
that weighed in to support Liu's nomination.
  The Washington Post remarked that:

       Mr. Liu has sterling credentials that earned him the 
     highest rating from the American Bar Association. And there 
     have been no allegations of impropriety to disqualify him 
     from serving. The brilliant professor [they call him], who 
     just turned 40 in October, testified that he would not allow 
     his academic musings to interfere with the duties of a lower-
     court judge to follow precedent. He should be confirmed and 
     given the opportunity to demonstrate that he can do that.

  I was going to ask unanimous consent because I know Senator Tester 
has been waiting for 40 minutes--I ask the Senator, does he need about 
5 or 7 minutes in morning business?
  Mr. TESTER. Yes.
  Mrs. BOXER. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Tester be able to 
speak for 7 minutes in morning business before we get to Senator 
Grassley; is that acceptable?
  Mr. GRASSLEY. If the Senator is done, that is OK.
  Mrs. BOXER. I am almost done.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Hagan). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mrs. BOXER. I am closing in the next 2 minutes.
  The Sacramento Bee noted that Liu would add luster to any court. The 
Los Angeles Times joined the New York Times in endorsing his 
confirmation.
  We heard from Professor Liu when I opened, and I am going to close by 
saying this: When we ask people in this country to give back to this 
Nation and they step to the plate and they want to give their talent to 
this Nation and they are supremely qualified and they bring with them 
mainstream views, mainstream endorsements, bipartisan endorsements from 
the progressive community to Ken Starr, for goodness' sake, give this 
man an up-or-down vote and do not say that you believe that judges 
deserve an up-or-down

[[Page S3093]]

vote when you are in the majority and suddenly say they do not deserve 
it now.
  I hope we will see the 60 votes for cloture and then the 51 votes for 
confirmation. I am privileged to have had this opportunity to share the 
story of Professor Goodwin Liu with my colleagues.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. TESTER. Madam President, I think this is appropriate. I ask 
unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.