[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 6 (Monday, January 11, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Pages S19-S21]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Trans-Pacific Partnership
Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I came from an informal hearing--not an
official Senate hearing but a hearing downstairs called by Congressman
Levin, who is the senior Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee. A
number of other Members were there, including my colleague from Ohio,
Representative Kaptur, and a number of people the Presiding Officer
served with in the House--Congressmen Sarbanes, Rangel, Pascrell,
Doggett, and Schiff. We discussed the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
I spoke earlier on this today. I know Senator McConnell has said that
he will not bring it up this year, I think in large part because of the
opposition from the country. Senator Lott, the Republican leader, a
decade or so ago said that you can't pass a trade agreement in an even-
numbered year. He was a strong supporter of these trade agreements. I
believe he and most in his party supported NAFTA and CAFTA. He wasn't
here for CAFTA but he was for some of those other trade agreements. But
he said that because he knows that politicians want to vote for these
trade agreements in large part because of corporate lobbying. But the
public doesn't want us to vote for these trade agreements.
My first year in Congress, I spent much of the year working in
opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement. I have seen a
number of these: NAFTA, PNTR with China, CAFTA, the trade agreement
with Korea, big promises about jobs, big claims about jobs, and
exaggerated commitments about jobs. Every time we lose jobs from these
trade agreements. Our trade deficit is up to a couple billion dollars a
day now. But if you buy a billion dollars of products from another
country rather than making them yourselves here, rather than American
companies making them, we know that costs us jobs. When you think it is
$2 billion--almost $2 billion every single day, well over a billion,
but the numbers are not precise--in trade deficit, where we buy from
other countries more than we export and sell to other countries, we
know it is costing us jobs.
One of the other things that came out of this discussion with a
number of Ways and Means Committee members, small business, a former
trade negotiator, and a union representative there was how we have seen
increasingly companies in Little Rock, in Dayton or in Toledo shut down
production here and move it overseas and then sell those products back
into the United States.
The auto industry has not done much of that. When the auto industry
sets up in Asia and are manufacturing cars, they typically sell them in
that part of the world. Unfortunately, GM just announced that they are
going to be making an SUV plant in China and selling those products
back into the United States. That is a terrible trend.
The reason I stopped on the floor before the vote in a couple of
minutes is to say this: The Trans-Pacific Partnership has set us up in
way that will make that worse. Under NAFTA, Canada, the United States,
and Mexico--I strongly oppose NAFTA. But under that trade agreement,
products in automobiles--almost two-thirds of all of the components in
an automobile--had to be made in one of these three countries in order
to get the tariff benefits from NAFTA for those companies, those
products. Now there are 12 countries in the Trans-Pacific Partnership
and fewer than half the components have to be made in one of these 12
countries.
What does that mean? It means that more than half of an automobile
can come from parts made in China but sold in the United States tariff-
free under the Trans-Pacific Partnership. How can we possibly think
that makes sense as a policy? That is fundamentally why the Trans-
Pacific Partnership does not make sense for our country. It doesn't
make sense for small businesses in Mansfield, OH, or in Springfield,
OH, and it doesn't make sense for the up to 600,000 workers in my
State--some 600,000 workers who are in the auto supply chain. We know a
lot of them will lose jobs under the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
I yield the rest of my time to Senator Leahy.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from
Ohio.
We are finally going to vote on the long overdue confirmation of
Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo to fill a judicial emergency vacancy on the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the third circuit in Pennsylvania. He was
nominated way over a year ago--nearly 14 months ago--with strong
bipartisan support from home State Senators. This is a case where,
unfortunately, the Republican leadership has subjected Judge Restrepo
to totally unnecessary delay as part of their wholesale obstruction of
judicial nominees. Their actions hurt not only the people of
Pennsylvania, but also Americans across the country as judicial
vacancies have remained unfilled nationwide after Republicans took over
the Senate majority last year.
I hope that today's vote and the agreement to vote on four district
court nominees this work period signals a return to the Senate
fulfilling its constitutional duty of providing advice and consent on
the President's nominees. In all of 2015, Senate Republicans allowed
votes on only 11 judicial nominations. This matched the record for
confirming the fewest number of judicial nominees in more than half a
century. I mention that because Democrats took the majority in the last
2 years of President Bush's term. We confirmed 40 judges during that
year--
[[Page S20]]
40. I was chairman. I remember that very well. I didn't want to repeat
the things that we saw during the Clinton administration, where the
Republicans came in and the then-Republican chairman of the Senate
Judiciary Committee killed over 60 nominees of the Clinton
administration by not allowing them to have a vote in committee. I
said: Let's move faster. I moved 40 through. Did the Republicans do the
same? No, they allowed 11.
Republicans also left town at the end of last year with 19 judicial
nominees still pending on the floor, including Judge Restrepo. Each of
the nominees has the support of their home state Senators and their
nominations were reported out of the Judiciary Committee by voice vote.
These are the kind of noncontroversial judicial nominees that the
Senate has traditionally confirmed at the end of a session. During the
Obama administration, however, Republicans have rejected this practice.
Judge Restrepo exemplifies the kind of consensus nominee that should
have been easily confirmed at the end of the session. He is nominated
to fill an emergency vacancy on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals,
which has two vacant judgeships in Pennsylvania. He has the strong
bipartisan support of his home state Senators, Senator Casey and
Senator Toomey. In fact, Senator Toomey has said he personally
recommended Judge Restrepo to the President for the nomination. In
2013, this body confirmed Judge Restrepo's nomination to the Federal
district court by voice vote. I have heard no objection from any
Senator to Judge Restrepo's nomination. I cannot believe this man who
will be the first Hispanic judge from Pennsylvania for the third
circuit was humiliated by having to wait 14 months. This highly
qualified Hispanic judge was told to go to the back of the line and
wait 14 months. It is wrong. It is absolutely wrong.
I will vote to confirm Judge Restrepo. Since 2013, he has served as a
judge on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania. For the seven years prior, he served as a Federal
magistrate judge on the same court. Before joining the bench, Judge
Restrepo was in private practice as a named partner at Krasner &
Restrepo. He began his legal career serving as a public defender as an
Assistant Defender for the Defender Association of Philadelphia before
becoming an Assistant Federal Defender for the Federal Community
Defender Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. He was voted
out of the Judiciary Committee by unanimous voice vote on July 9, 2015.
His nomination has the full support of the Hispanic National Bar
Association. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a
copy of the Hispanic National Bar Association's letter in support of
Judge Restrepo at the conclusion of my remarks.
Republicans' obstruction of highly qualified judicial nominees with
strong support, like Judge Restrepo, has resulted in a sharp rise in
judicial vacancies. When Senate Republicans took over the majority in
January of last year, there were 43 judicial vacancies. After a year of
Republicans neglecting judicial confirmations, vacancies have
dramatically increased to 72--an increase of more than 60 percent.
Furthermore, the number of judicial vacancies deemed to be
``emergencies'' by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts because
caseloads in those courts are unmanageably high has nearly tripled
under Republican Senate leadership--from 12 when Republicans took over
last year to 33 today. In his annual year-end report, even Chief
Justice Roberts drew our attention to the ``crushing dockets'' and
heavy caseloads that strain the Federal judiciary and prevent Americans
from obtaining timely justice in our courts.
The high number of vacancies is entirely of the Senate Republican
leadership's making, and Senate action is required to resolve it. The
first step is to confirm the rest of the 18 judicial nominees pending
right now on the floor. Under a bipartisan agreement reached at the end
of last year, the Majority Leader will schedule confirmation votes on
four district court nominees between now and the President's Day
recess. After we vote on those nominees, we will still have nominees
from Tennessee, Maryland, New Jersey, Nebraska, New York, and
California pending on the floor, nearly all of whom would fill
emergency vacancies. Votes on these nominees must be scheduled without
further delay.
Let's start facing up to fact that we have enormous problems with
judiciary emergencies in States where both Republicans and Democrats
have supported the nominees. Let them come forward. Let them be voted
on. Let's stop making the Federal courts a political pawn. It is bad
enough with all the political shenanigans going on in this country
anyway in an election year. Don't do them with the Federal court
system. We have the best, the most honest, the least partisan Federal
court system anywhere in the world. But don't say: Oh, you are a highly
qualified Hispanic nominee, but you just wait there for 14 months, be
humiliated, and then we will finally allow a vote. I don't care whether
someone is Hispanic or non-Hispanic; we have so many men and women who
are highly qualified.
In addition to the nominees pending on the floor, there are also four
Pennsylvania district court nominees that the Senate Judiciary
Committee is poised to report out this month. I sincerely hope the
junior Senator from Pennsylvania can convince the Republican Majority
Leader not to submit these additional Pennsylvania nominees to the
extensive confirmation delay that Judge Restrepo endured. The people of
Pennsylvania have waited long enough. I also understand that the White
House has been working for months with Senator Toomey and Senator Casey
on the second Pennsylvania vacancy on the third circuit. I look forward
to the Judiciary Committee considering that nomination soon.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
March 31, 2015.
Re Hispanic National Bar Association Endorsement of
Nomination of The Honorable Luis Felipe Restrepo to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Hon. Chuck Grassley,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Patrick Leahy,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Leahy: On behalf
of the Hispanic National Bar Association (``HNBA''), we write
to recommend the confirmation of the Honorable Luis Felipe
Restrepo to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third
Circuit. As explained below, we believe that Judge Restrepo
has all the requisite qualifications to serve in this role
and will serve the Court and the parties that come before it
with distinction and integrity.
The HNBA is a non-profit, non-partisan national membership
association that represents the interests of Hispanic
attorneys, judges, law professors, law students, and legal
professionals in the United States and Puerto Rico. One of
the HNBA's many institutional objectives is to advocate and
work to ensure that the federal and state courts in our
nation are diverse and reflect the citizenry that come before
our courts daily.
Judge Restrepo sought the HNBA's endorsement shortly after
President Obama nominated him to the United States Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit. The HNBA conducted a thorough
due diligence process that included interviews of personal
and professional references (including judges and attorneys),
a review of his scholarly writings and legal opinions, and a
thorough Internet search. We also have considered his
background and qualifications in the context of the
requirements of the position for which he was nominated, as
well as the requirements of the HNBA's Policies and
Procedures Governing Judicial Endorsements. After a careful
review, it is clear that Judge Restrepo possesses the
professional expertise, experience, personal integrity and
judicial temperament to distinguish himself as a federal
appellate judge. Accordingly, we urge you to confirm his
nomination to the United States Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit.
Prior to being sworn in as a District Judge for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania in 2013 and his appointment as a
Magistrate Judge in 2006, Judge Restrepo was a highly-
regarded Philadelphia attorney and founding member of the
firm of Krasner & Restrepo, concentrating on criminal defense
and civil rights litigation. Before forming his law firm, he
served as an assistant federal defender with the Community
Federal Defender for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania,
and an assistant defender for the Defender Association of
Philadelphia. He is an adjunct professor at Temple University
James E. Beasley School of Law, was an adjunct professor at
the University of Pennsylvania Law School from 1997-2009
where he was appointed the Irving R. Segal Lecturer in
advocacy, and has taught with the National Institute for
Trial Advocacy in regional and national programs since 1991.
He
[[Page S21]]
has been a lecturer at seminars sponsored by a number of
agencies and organizations and has written numerous articles
appearing in a variety of national publications. Throughout
his career, Judge Restrepo has stood out as an exceptional
role model for community involvement and civic participation.
He has devoted his time and expertise to a variety of boards
and commissions as well as the Eastern District prisoner
reentry program.
The HNBA's due diligence process has confirmed that Judge
Restrepo's integrity, knowledge of the law, breadth of
professional experience, and intellectual capacity make him
well suited to sit as a federal appellate judge. Accordingly,
it is with great pride that we have the privilege of
endorsing the Honorable Luis Felipe Restrepo and recommend
his confirmation to serve as a Judge on the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Please do not
hesitate to contact us at the HNBA National Office at (202)
223-4777, or you may contact Cynthia D. Mares directly at
(720) 314-1295 or by e-mail at [email protected], if we can
be of any further assistance.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Cynthia D. Mares,
HNBA National President.
Robert Raben,
Chair, HNBA Judiciary Committee.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I know the time for the vote is upon us.
Have the yeas and nays been ordered?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not.
Mr. LEAHY. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
Mr. LEAHY. I yield back all time, and I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, all time is yielded back.
The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination
of Luis Felipe Restrepo, of Pennsylvania, to be United States Circuit
Judge for the Third Circuit?
The yeas and nays have been ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the
Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Cassidy), the Senator from Indiana (Mr.
Coats), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Crapo), the Senator from Texas (Mr.
Cruz), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from
Georgia (Mr. Isakson), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), the
Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Scott), and the Senator from Louisiana
(Mr. Vitter).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Franken),
the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Michigan
(Ms. Stabenow) are necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Lankford). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 82, nays 6, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 1 Ex.]
YEAS--82
Alexander
Ayotte
Baldwin
Barrasso
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Boozman
Boxer
Brown
Burr
Cantwell
Capito
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Cochran
Collins
Coons
Corker
Cornyn
Cotton
Daines
Donnelly
Durbin
Enzi
Ernst
Feinstein
Fischer
Flake
Gardner
Gillibrand
Grassley
Hatch
Heinrich
Heitkamp
Heller
Hirono
Hoeven
Johnson
Kaine
King
Kirk
Klobuchar
Lankford
Leahy
Manchin
Markey
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Moran
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Nelson
Paul
Perdue
Peters
Portman
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rounds
Sasse
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Sullivan
Tester
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Udall
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NAYS--6
Blunt
Inhofe
Lee
Risch
Sessions
Shelby
NOT VOTING--12
Cassidy
Coats
Crapo
Cruz
Franken
Graham
Isakson
Rubio
Sanders
Scott
Stabenow
Vitter
The nomination was confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to
reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the President
will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
____________________