[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 15, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1813-S1814]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Nomination of Neil Gorsuch
Finally, Mr. President, next week, the Judiciary Committee will take
up the nomination of Neil Gorsuch for the U.S. Supreme Court so he may
fill the seat that was vacated by the death of Justice Scalia. That
process, of course, begins with hearings to consider his qualifications
and his credentials, but heading into next week, we already know a lot
about his record.
He has been praised by people across the political spectrum--from
liberals to conservatives--as a highly qualified and exceptional judge
with impeccable integrity. He served with great distinction on the
Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, based out of Denver, for the last 10
years, after having been confirmed by this Chamber unanimously. His
hometown newspaper, the Denver Post, encouraged the President to
nominate Judge Gorsuch before his nomination was even announced. This,
of course, was the same newspaper that endorsed Hillary Clinton for
President. Clearly, Judge Gorsuch has won the respect of those across
the political spectrum and on both sides of the aisle. Last week, the
American Bar Association announced its unanimous decision to grant
Judge Gorsuch the highest rating available; that of ``well qualified''
as a nominee to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States.
I should point out that both the minority leader and former chairman
of the Judiciary Committee--the senior Senator from Vermont--have
called the American Bar Association's rating system the ``gold
standard'' when it comes to assessing the qualifications of judicial
nominees.
Judge Gorsuch will also bring decades of experience on the bench, as
I mentioned a moment ago. He has also served in private practice, as an
attorney with the Justice Department, and, of course, as a Federal
judge.
It is time to move forward with the President's nominee to fill the
seat that was left open by the death of the late Justice Scalia, and I
believe Judge Gorsuch is just the man to fill it. I look forward to
hearing from him next week as we consider his nomination to this
important position.
I express my gratitude to Chairman Grassley and the ranking member,
Senator Feinstein, for their efforts thus far in putting these hearings
together, and I look forward to working with the rest of my colleagues
on the Judiciary Committee to consider the nomination of Judge Gorsuch,
starting next Monday, March 20.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I know both sides are working on trying to
get an arrangement for the vote.
Mr. President, I also want to tell my colleague from Texas that I
listened very carefully to his remarks with respect to transparency in
government. He has had a long interest in the Freedom of Information
Act and the like. I noted that he made a comment about the Bay of Pigs,
about which information is still classified, and I know something about
this because my dad wrote a book about the subject. My hope is that my
friend from Texas and his interest in transparency will also extend to
some other areas.
As I indicated, I am very familiar with my colleague's record with
respect to Freedom of Information Act issues, which really is
impressive. I
[[Page S1814]]
hope to get him involved in some other areas of transparency--perhaps
in campaign finance reform and the issue I am going to be speaking
about today, that of getting the American people the information--after
6 years of stonewalling--on how many lawful Americans are getting swept
up in what will be Dan Coats' top priority, that of the reauthorization
of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
I want my colleague to know, in my being very much aware of his good
work on the Freedom of Information Act issues, that we are going to try
and conscript them into some other transparency issues as well.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, may I ask the Senator to yield to consider
a couple of brief consent requests?
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, of course.
I will tell my colleague, as to what the majority and the minority
have agreed to, as soon as those consent requests are ready, then we
will take a time out from my remarks and make sure that matter is
resolved.
As we wait for the matter Senator Cornyn has mentioned, I will begin
the discussion of the nomination of Dan Coats to be the Director of
National Intelligence.
I have known Senator Coats for many years. He has been the lead
cosponsor of the bipartisan Federal income tax reform proposal, which
has been a special priority of mine. I do not know of a single U.S.
Senator who does not like Senator Coats. He is honest, a straight
shooter, and gracious. My remarks are not about my personal affection
for Senator Coats.
The reason I am voting against the nomination is due to the matter I
just touched upon with the Senator from Texas, which is, for 6 years,
it has been impossible to get the intelligence community to provide the
Congress and the American people information that is absolutely
critical to the debate on reauthorizing the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act. For 6 long years, Democrats and Republicans, both in
this body and in the other body, have been trying to get this
information.
So this morning, given the fact that this legislation would be the
top priority of Senator Coats, as he said in the Intelligence
Committee, I want the Senate and the country to understand why this
issue is so important.
First, I am happy to yield to my friend from Texas.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.