[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 58 (Tuesday, April 4, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2208-S2210]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



      Kirk Yeager, Dennis Wagner, Edward Grace, and Mariela Melero

  Mr. President, that sense of what we are dealing with now in our 
politics today is the subject that I want to speak about for a few 
minutes; that is, the incredibly important efforts made each and every 
day by our public servants.
  We often forget that our public servants, our Federal employees, go 
to work every day with the sole mission to make the country a better 
and safer place. Day after day they go to work, receiving little 
recognition for the great work they do. Since 2010, I have come to the 
Senate floor to honor exemplary Federal employees--a tradition that was 
begun by my friend Senator Ted Kaufman. One of those Federal employees 
is actually sitting at the desk and has helped me and I know so many 
other Senators as we have tried to learn this job.
  The reason I wanted to come back today was because today, in light of 
a governmentwide hiring freeze, the reinstatement of the so-called 
Holman rule, a proposed budget that would deeply cut our Federal 
workforce, and candidly, in these times, the targeting of career civil 
servants by certain conservative media outlets, this tradition of 
honoring those who serve, oftentimes without recognition, our Federal 
employees, feels even more important.
  Our Federal employees--over 170,000 of them Virginians--serve their 
country dutifully regardless of the party in power. Not only do they 
carry out the mission of the administration they are serving, but they 
also provide countless benefits to the American public. It is my hope 
that my colleagues and the current administration will remember these 
facts and set aside ideology when considering actions that affect our 
Federal agencies and their workforce.
  Today I want to take a couple of moments to recognize a few 
Virginians who are working behind the scenes to actually make our 
government more efficient and more effective.
  First, I would like to recognize Kirk Yeager. Kirk is the Chief 
Explosives Scientist at the FBI. In this role, he both responds to 
crises and oversees the Bureau's efforts to better understand the 
explosives terrorists use. Having studied bomb-making for more than 20 
years, Kirk works with both domestic and foreign law enforcement 
agencies and has developed and provided crucial training to every bomb 
squad in the United States and to many of our foreign allies. Through 
his work, Kirk has made U.S. civilian law enforcement personnel and 
those who serve our country in the military much safer.
  Next, I would like to recognize Dennis Wagner. Dennis is the Director 
of the Quality Improvement and Innovation Group at the Centers for 
Medicare and Medicaid Services. As part of a team at CMS, Dennis 
contributed to the creation of the Partnership for Patients, a public-
private partnership to increase patient safety and reduce readmissions 
to U.S. hospitals. Their work has produced outstanding results, 
including 2.1 million fewer patients harmed and $20 billion saved. That 
is a remarkable statistic, and obviously the work going on at CMS--an 
agency that does not get a lot of recognition; candidly, most people 
don't even know--a person like this gentleman, Dennis, has made our 
healthcare system better.
  Third, I would like to recognize Edward Grace. Edward is the Deputy 
Chief in the Office of Law Enforcement at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service. In that role, Edward has been leading a nationwide law 
enforcement investigation known as Operation Crash, targeting those who 
smuggle and trade rhino horns and elephant ivory. In addition to 
assisting in the Department's efforts to preserve global biodiversity, 
Operation Crash has led to 41 arrests, 30 convictions, and the seizure 
of millions of dollars in smuggled goods--results that show that those 
seeking to engage in this kind of activity--there will be real legal 
consequences to their actions.
  Finally, I would like to recognize Mariela Melero. Mariela is the 
Associate Director for the Customer Service and Public Engagement 
Directorate at the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Mariela 
and her team have been working to improve the way USCIS interacts with 
the millions of people who contact their office seeking citizenship, 
permanent residency, refugee status, or other assistance. Central to 
that mission are the innovative improvements Mariela has made to the 
myUSCIS website, as well as the launch of Emma, a virtual assistant 
that in a typical month answers nearly

[[Page S2209]]

500,000 questions with a success rate of nearly 90 percent.
  To ensure that this resource was available to a wide range of 
customers, Mariela also oversaw the creation of a Spanish-speaking Emma 
that came online in 2016. These important improvements have been 
crucial to driving efficiency for the world's largest immigration 
system in the world.
  Again, I hope my colleagues--as we think about budgets and numbers 
and when we hear people who oftentimes denigrate our Federal 
employees--will remember some of these individuals who, not for great 
reward or recognition, actually get up each and every day and go to 
work, trying to ensure that our government functions for the hundreds 
of millions of Americans who oftentimes don't acknowledge or recognize 
their services enough.
  Mr. President, as I mentioned at the outset, I know this is a time 
when most of my colleagues are speaking on Judge Gorsuch. I will simply 
add, after a careful review of his record and my belief as well, that 
his unwillingness to really give truly straight answers in terms of 
comments--whether it was basic, decided legal opinions like Brown v. 
Board of Education or Roe v. Wade or Citizens United--and his failure 
to even answer those questions has unfortunately led me to join with so 
many of my other colleagues in voting against him.
  I still hope that there is a way that we can avoid changing the rules 
of the Senate during this process. I know there are many colleagues who 
are working on those efforts. If they are successful, I look forward to 
joining them.
  As we think about Judge Gorsuch, as we recognize the challenges we 
have ahead of us, let us also--those of us who serve in this body--
continue to take a moment every day to say thanks to a Federal employee 
who, in one way or another, works tirelessly day in and day out to make 
our country a better place.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, last week on this Senate floor, I made the 
case for Democrats and Republicans joining together to confirm one of 
the most qualified individuals ever nominated to the U.S. Supreme 
Court. I was referring, of course, to Chief Judge Merrick Garland.
  I don't wish to belabor the point here this evening, but it bears 
repeating that Judge Garland brought with him more Federal judicial 
experience than any Supreme Court nominee in the history of the United 
States.
  It bears repeating that Judge Garland is an extraordinary man, a good 
man, a brilliant man, a fair judge, and a consensus builder on the 
bench in a day and age when we need consensus builders on the Supreme 
Court and other courts across the country. Frankly, we also need them 
right here on this floor, in this body.
  It bears repeating that the obstruction of Judge Garland's nomination 
was unprecedented in the history of the United States of America and in 
the history of the Senate.
  Since the Senate Judiciary Committee began holding public hearings on 
Supreme Court nominations in 1916, no Supreme Court nominee had ever 
been denied a hearing and a vote--until Judge Garland. Many of our 
Republican colleagues refused to meet with him. When his nomination 
expired at noon on January 3, 2017, 293 days had passed--293 wasted 
days.
  A good man was treated badly. I believe our Constitution was treated 
badly. I believe that the obstruction of Judge Garland's nomination was 
unprecedented. I believe it was shameful. From my view, we cannot 
pretend that this vacant seat on the Supreme Court--what I believe 
should be Judge Garland's seat--is anything other than blatant 
partisanship.
  I believe that upholding my oath to protect the Constitution means 
finding agreement on moving Judge Garland's nomination forward at the 
same time--at the same time as that of Judge Neil Gorsuch, President 
Trump's Supreme Court nominee.
  I have no choice but to oppose Judge Gorsuch's nomination this week 
because anything else would be a stamp of approval for what I believe 
is playing politics with Supreme Court nominees. I cannot support Judge 
Gorsuch's nomination because we cannot have one set of rules for 
Democratic Presidents and another set of rules for Republican 
Presidents.
  Some of my colleagues and maybe some of the Americans listening at 
home tonight may be asking themselves: Well, Senator Carper, didn't the 
Democrats change the rules for judges when they were in the majority? 
That is a fair question. To that, I would say yes. That is true for 
lower court nominees, nominees to Federal district courts and courts of 
appeals.
  But it wasn't because Senator Harry Reid woke up one morning and 
decided that was the day to change the rules of the Senate. A decision 
of this magnitude didn't happen on a whim. It was because, by the time 
November 2013 had arrived, our Republican friends had attempted to 
block--get this--more nominations in the first 5 years of President 
Obama's tenure than all other Presidents combined. Let me say that 
again. It was because, by the time November 2013 had arrived, our 
Republican friends had attempted to block more nominations in the first 
5 years of President Obama's tenure than all other Presidents combined.
  It wasn't the unprecedented use of cloture motions--79 cloture 
motions--during those 5 years that precipitated Democrats' seeking a 
solution to restore the capability of the Senate to do its job. It was 
because our Republican friends refused to consider any nominee--any 
nominee--to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, despite three critical 
vacancies on our Nation's second highest court.
  So, yes, it is true that Democrats supported a change that allowed a 
vote on those nominees, but it was because our Republican friends took 
the unheard of position that no nominees--no nominees, no matter their 
qualifications--were entitled to a vote.
  I should note that Democrats were careful to preserve the 60 votes 
for Supreme Court nominees.
  Let me just say that, if there is any position in the Federal 
Government that should require at least 60 votes, my view is it should 
be the Supreme Court, and that is the rule under which we operate as of 
this moment.
  One of the reasons why is because Supreme Court vacancies come around 
quite rarely. When they do, we need to ensure that debate is robust, we 
need to ensure that the nominee is from the judicial and the political 
mainstream, and we need to ensure that these lifetime appointments are 
held to the highest standards. In other words, I believe we need a 
nominee like Judge Merrick Garland.
  Despite his own impressive resume, I have concerns with Judge 
Gorsuch's nomination beyond the treatment of Judge Garland, and I have 
concerns with the way that our debate has not been, frankly, robust. I 
have concerns that Judge Gorsuch's views are outside the judicial and 
political mainstream, and I have concerns about what others have termed 
``evasiveness.'' His evasiveness before the Judiciary Committee does 
not meet the high standards that we should expect for those lifetime 
appointments.
  I would be remiss if I did not mention what I referred to last week 
as the cloud that lingers still over President Trump's campaign. Like 
many Americans, I read the news related to Russia and the Trump 
campaign, and I come to the inescapable conclusion that the cloud is 
darkening and the forecast is a matter of grave concern for our 
Constitution.
  FBI Director Jim Comey has testified under oath that there is an 
ongoing investigation to determine the links between the Trump campaign 
and Russia, an adversary that attacked our election and undermined a 
free and fair election to change the outcome of that election. From all 
appearances, they did.
  To hastily move forward with Judge Gorsuch--who is 49 years old, who 
could serve on the Supreme Court well into the middle of this century--
without first getting to the bottom of the suspicious and irregular 
actions of Trump campaign officials would be, in my view, a mistake.

[[Page S2210]]

  For many Americans, this Supreme Court seat will always come with an 
asterisk attached to it. They believe and I believe that it was a 
stolen seat that belonged to Judge Merrick Garland.
  Many Americans are wondering why we are rushing to fill a lifetime 
vacancy while President Trump's campaign remains under investigation 
and will for at least some while.
  I believe we have some time. Judge Garland waited 293 days for a 
hearing and a vote that never came. Judge Gorsuch has waited 48 days 
for a hearing and many of our Republican friends would like to see him 
seated this week.
  Again, I would say: Judge Merrick Garland waited 293 days for a 
hearing and a vote that never, never came.
  What we face here today, I think, is a rush to judgment. I would just 
say that we have time. We ought to hit the pause button on this 
nomination.
  The American people are watching us, and history will judge us. I 
fear that history may judge us poorly if anyone other than Merrick 
Garland is confirmed at this time. I fear that history may judge us 
poorly if we do not insist that the Trump campaign is first cleared of 
any wrongdoing before we move forward. We need to get this right. We 
have time to get this right.
  The Senate has been through it all. The good men and women of the 
Senate have always disagreed--sometimes passionately, oftentimes 
loudly. I understand that this disagreement before us may seem 
irresolvable, but that is only if we seek to cut off debate and admit 
defeat. Personally speaking, I am not ready to do that today or this 
week.
  I believe we have time. I believe we have the opportunity to right a 
historic wrong. We have not just an opportunity to right a historic 
wrong but also an obligation to get this right.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, it is pretty obvious, based on the 
announcement Senators have made, that we are experiencing the first 
partisan filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee in the history of the 
country.
  We have had plenty of time to discuss Judge Gorsuch and his 
credentials both in committee and on the floor, and I think it is now 
important to move forward.