[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 173 (Monday, December 9, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Page S8558]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUESTS--EXECUTIVE CALENDAR
Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to
executive session to consider the following nominations: Calendar Nos.
44, 144, 189, 303, 334, 356, 358, 359, 361, 362, 367, 371, 372, 378,
379, 380, 387, 388, 390, 391, 403, 404, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 412,
413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 420, 422, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428,
429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 438, 439, 440, 441, 442, 443, 444, 445, 446,
447, 448, 449, 450, 451, and 452; that the nominations be confirmed en
bloc; the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid on the
table, with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be
in order to any of the nominations; that any related statements be
printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of
the Senate's action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Tennessee.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Reserving my right, and I will make my remarks on this
matter after the majority leader has completed his business today, I
would note that on the last day we were here, November 21, there were
only 16 nominations on the Executive Calendar that had been there more
than 3 weeks, only 8 more than 9 weeks, and the Republicans were ready
to confirm more than 40 who had been there only a few weeks. The
Democratic majority changed the rules of the Senate in a way that
creates a Senate without rules. Until I understand better how a Senator
is supposed to operate in a Senate without rules, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. REID. Madam President, I am not going to respond in any detail to
my friend, and he is my friend. There is no way of explaining how the
Republicans could arbitrarily refuse to nominate four of the most
qualified people, frankly, because they turned down one woman twice for
the DC Circuit. This is, some say, a court more important than the U.S.
Supreme Court. The Republicans, without any question about their
integrity, their education, their experience, said no. Why? Because
they don't want President Obama to have these people in this important
court. They want to keep the court with the majority of Republicans.
That is wrong. It is wrong, and there were many reasons we did what we
did, but it was the right thing for the country and it is the right
thing for democracy.
I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to consider the
following nominations: Calendar Nos. 330, 347, 348, 349, 350, 382, 383,
384, 385, 386, 434, 435, 436, and 437; that the nominations be
confirmed; the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon
the table, with no intervening action or debate; that no further
motions be in order to any of the nominations; that any statements
related to the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President
be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then
resume legislative session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Tennessee.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Reserving my right to object, again I will make my
comments after the majority leader has completed his business, but all
Senate Republicans wanted with the DC Circuit judges was to do what
Democratic Senators insisted on doing in 2006, transferring judges from
a court where they are not needed to courts where they are needed.
I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. REID. That explanation is as flat as a bottle of beer that has
been open for 6 months.
____________________