[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 40 (Monday, March 14, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1446-S1447]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   FILLING THE SUPREME COURT VACANCY

  Mr. REID. Madam President, Senate Republicans have finally admitted 
that their obstruction of President Obama's Supreme Court nominee has 
nothing to do with precedent, it has nothing to do with history, it has 
nothing to do with the Constitution, but it has everything to do with 
partisan politics.
  Last Thursday, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee forced 
Chairman Grassley and the committee Republicans to debate the Supreme 
Court vacancy during a markup. Remember, this is the same markup the 
chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Grassley, canceled a week 
earlier because he and Republicans didn't want to make the meeting open 
to the public. He tried to have a secret meeting; Democrats wouldn't 
agree.
  On last Thursday when they finally had a meeting, the senior Senator 
from South Carolina, a Republican, said:

       We are setting a precedent here today, Republicans are, 
     that in the last year at least of a lame duck eight-year 
     term--I would say it's going to be a four-year term--that 
     you're not going to fill a vacancy of the Supreme Court based 
     on what we're doing here today. We're headed to changing the 
     rules, probably in a permanent fashion.

  I applaud Senator Graham's forthrightness in admitting what his 
Republican colleagues refuse to admit: Their obstruction of a Supreme 
Court nominee is unprecedented. The senior Senator from South Carolina 
said that, and that is what I have been saying.
  So the question then remains, if denying President Obama's nominee a 
meeting, a hearing, and a vote has nothing to do with Senate precedent, 
then what is this all about? Fortunately, last Thursday also yielded an 
answer to that question. During an interview with a Wisconsin radio 
station, the Republican Senator from Wisconsin, Senator Ron Johnson, 
was asked if he would treat a Supreme Court nominee from a Republican 
President differently. He answered:

       Generally, and this is the way it works out politically . . 
     . if a conservative president's replacing a conservative 
     justice, there's a little more accommodation to it.

  The Senator from Wisconsin admitted that he and his colleagues would 
accommodate the Supreme Court nomination from a Republican President. 
So Senate Republicans are talking out of both sides of their mouths. 
Republicans claim they are simply adhering to precedent, even as they 
admit they are permanently changing the way the Senate treats Supreme 
Court nominees.
  Republicans claim they want to give the American people a voice. That 
is what elections are all about. President Obama's reelection was the 
American people's voice.
  Republicans claim--I repeat--they want to give the American people a 
voice and wait until after a new President is sworn in, even while 
admitting they would consider a Republican President's nominee right 
now. It doesn't make sense. It is illogical. It is unfair.
  The American people do not accept this duplicitous posturing. They 
don't accept it as a rationalization for why Republicans won't do their 
jobs.
  Over the weekend, the editorial board of Iowa City Press-Citizen--the 
Presiding Officer's home State--made clear what they want Senator 
Grassley and Senate Republicans to do: They want Republicans to follow 
the Constitution.

       Partisan posturing to score points at the expense of 
     Constitutional process doesn't change character based on the 
     letter next to a lawmaker's name. . . . Currently, a Democrat 
     is in the White House as this pitched battle is fought, but 
     were the roles reversed, we would not alter our position. If, 
     down the line, a Supreme Court Justice retired or died in a 
     presidential election year with a Republican in power, we 
     would similarly urge a fair hearing for that president's 
     nominee.

  The Senate's constitutional duty transcends partisan bickering. The 
people of Iowa and America don't want a Senate that treats its 
constitutional duties differently based on who is in the White House. 
They want a Senate that does its job. They want Republicans to do their 
jobs.
  So I say to my Republican colleagues, enough with the hollow excuses 
and groundless rationalizations. Do your jobs and give President 
Obama's Supreme Court nominee a meeting, a hearing, and a vote.
  Madam President, there is another aspect of this Supreme Court fight 
we must address. Already, as we know, Republicans are resorting to what 
they call pinata politics. That is what Senator Cornyn promised. 
Radical conservative groups are starting to run smear campaigns 
targeting President Obama's potential Supreme Court nominees. One of 
those potential nominees is from Iowa.
  One such ad from the Judicial Crisis Network, a dark money, rightwing 
political organization that operates in total secrecy--not knowing 
where its money comes from; probably the Koch brothers because they 
fund most everything else--is especially appalling. The ad takes aim at 
an Iowan serving on the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Jane 
Kelly. The accusations leveled against Judge Kelly are despicable, and 
they deserve to be answered by her home State Senator--I should say 
Senators.
  Senator Grassley is on record as having strongly supported Judge 
Kelly's confirmation to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. It was he 
who came to the floor in 2013 and read from a letter stating that Judge 
Kelly is ``a forthright woman of high integrity and honest character . 
. . and exceptionally keen intellect.'' It was Senator Grassley who 
told his colleagues at about the same time: ``I am pleased to support 
her confirmation and urge my colleagues to join me.'' And Senator 
Grassley's Judicial Committee, of which he was a senior member, even 
helped vet Judge Kelly's record before endorsing her confirmation to 
the bench.
  If there was something wrong with her judicial nomination, he 
certainly didn't find it. Yet Senator Grassley has been silent in the 
wake of these recent smears against Judge Kelly. I

[[Page S1447]]

know the senior Senator from Iowa has been busy listening to what the 
Republican leader's line is on the Supreme Court vacancy, but this 
disgusting rightwing attack from Republicans to a fellow Iowan--a judge 
he enthusiastically supported--demands a response.
  Senator Grassley needs to tell the people of Iowa whether he supports 
the smear campaign that his own Republicans are hurling at Judge Jane 
Kelly. Does he support the smear campaign? That is a question that 
needs to be answered, especially since the Judicial Crisis Network--
this rightwing, secretly funded by dark money--has been in lockstep 
with Senator Grassley's obstruction and even praising him while at the 
same time smearing Judge Kelly.
  If he doesn't go on record, he needs to do something. I can't imagine 
why he wouldn't go on record denouncing this type of disgusting 
rhetoric. I look forward to the senior Senator from Iowa setting the 
record straight on his fellow Iowan and a judge whom he personally 
endorsed.
  Madam President, there is no one on the floor. Will the Chair 
announce the business of the day.

                          ____________________