[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 68 (Thursday, April 26, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2447-S2448]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               NOMINATIONS AND THE APPROPRIATIONS PROCESS

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, this week we confirmed yet another 
well-qualified nominee to the Federal bench. Now Kyle Duncan of 
Louisiana can get to work serving on the Fifth Circuit Court of 
Appeals. His qualifications are truly impressive, but his sterling 
reputation among colleagues and peers was an even greater testament to 
Mr. Duncan's fitness. I am glad that the Fifth Circuit will benefit 
from his expertise.
  Speaking of well-qualified nominees, the Senate will vote today on 
the President's choice for Secretary of State. We will consider an 
outstanding nominee. Fortunately, we have the votes, and later today we 
will confirm Mike Pompeo as our Nation's 70th Secretary of State.
  We have been discussing Director Pompeo's abundant qualifications all 
week. In a little over a year, the Senate has had two opportunities to 
assess his considerable qualifications.
  Last January, a bipartisan supermajority of us saw fit to confirm him 
as CIA Director, and his performance in that role--exemplary by all 
accounts--has given us even more compelling cause to confirm him to 
serve as our chief diplomat.
  He has earned the trust and the confidence of the Commander in Chief 
by providing top-notch counsel on critical issues and helping to lead 
ongoing efforts to lay the groundwork for negotiations aimed at 
denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula. Along the way, he deepened his 
reputation for fairness and discernment.
  I am glad President Trump has nominated this distinguished leader to 
be America's chief diplomat, and I am glad a bipartisan majority of 
Senators will vote to confirm him today.
  It is just too bad that Director Pompeo's confirmation process has 
offered such a prime example of the historic partisan obstruction that 
my colleagues across the aisle are visiting on the Senate. All fair 
observers agree that Mike is up to the job. Here is how the Washington 
Post--not known as a bastion of Republican thinking--titled their 
editorial, simply: ``Confirm Mike Pompeo.''
  But despite all this, Democrats on the Foreign Relations Committee 
almost took the unprecedented step of voting him out with an 
unfavorable recommendation. That attempt to play politics with our 
Nation's security fortunately failed. But even so, according to the 
Senate Historian, he became just the second Secretary of State nominee 
in recent memory to clear a committee by a margin of only one vote. The 
only other time that has happened in all of the Senate's history was 
also at the hands of Senate Democrats during the Trump administration. 
Once they got here on the floor, they were also the only two Secretary 
of State nominees in history who needed cloture to receive confirmation 
votes.
  Let me say that again. From the founding of the Republic until 2017, 
the Senate never required cloture to confirm a Secretary of State. Now 
we are at two, both in this administration. I guess Senate Democrats 
are in a history-making mood, because over the past 15 months, they 
have embarked on a partisan campaign to block, obstruct, and delay 
President Trump's nominees that is, quite simply, without precedent in 
American history.
  Let's put things in perspective. In the first 2 years of the last 6 
Presidencies combined--the first 2 years of the last 6 Presidencies 
combined--the Senate subjected nominees to a total of 24 cloture votes 
during the last 6 Presidencies during the first 2 years--24 cloture 
votes.
  Add up President Carter's first 2 years, President Reagan's first 2 
years, and so on, through Presidents Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama and 
there are 24 total cloture votes on nominees.
  For President Trump? There are 88 and counting, just 15 months into 
his term. By the end of the day, it will be 90--90 cloture votes on 
nominees. This is partisan obstruction elevated to an art form, and 
every one of us has seen it firsthand.
  It is not just high-profile nominations. Scores of unobjectionable 
choices for all kinds of posts have languished on the Senate calendar. 
It took

[[Page S2448]]

months and months and several deadly accidents to persuade Senate 
Democrats to stop obstructing a fully qualified nominee to lead the 
Federal Railroad Administration.
  Or take the example of district court judges. With only one 
exception, we have had to file cloture on every single district court 
nominee. It doesn't matter if every Democrat on the Judiciary Committee 
supported the nominee. It doesn't matter if every Democrat in the whole 
Senate supports the nominee. No matter what, our colleagues across the 
aisle are insisting on obstruction, for no apparent reason.
  Here are some of the final vote totals for these district judges: 96 
to 1; 98 to 0; 97 to 3; 95 to 0; 96 to 0; 98 to 0, once again; 100 to 
0.
  Back in January, it took more than a week of the Senate's time to 
confirm four district court judges, and not one Senator voted no on any 
of them--a whole week to do four district judges, and not one Senator 
voted no on any of them.
  Our problem is not the qualified personnel before us. Our problem is 
that nearly half of the Senate has decided that resisting for the sake 
of resistance is more politically advantageous than doing right by this 
institution or by our constituents. This, regrettably, is where we are: 
Democrats chewing up hours of Senate time on nominees that literally no 
Senator opposes.
  I understand that my friends on the other side have a number of 
disagreements with the President. That tends to happen in politics, but 
that is no excuse at all for this historic obstruction of 
noncontroversial nominees. It is bad for the Senate. It is unfair to 
the American people.
  That is why I support Senator Lankford's efforts to enact the very 
same rules change--the very same rules change--that a large and 
bipartisan majority agreed to back in 2013, when the Democrats were in 
the majority here in the Senate. It would empower the Senate to process 
nominations more quickly while preserving ample opportunity for debate. 
It is precisely the rules change that my friend the Democratic leader 
supported back in 2013. I joined in that bipartisan effort, along with 
a number of my fellow Republicans. It passed 78 to 16--78 to 16. The 
White House may have changed hands, but the last time I checked, fair 
is still fair, and common sense is still common sense.
  So Senator Lankford is giving my Democratic colleagues their very own 
chance to show that principled convictions matter more than political 
convenience. I am proud to back his proposal. I am glad to see the 
Rules Committee advance it to the floor yesterday. There is no reason 
why every Senator shouldn't be able to join us.
  Otherwise, until our Democratic colleagues put aside their historic 
obstruction, Republicans continue to do our duty and process the 
President's nominations, one way or the other. Let me repeat that. We 
are processing these nominations, one way or the other.
  After Mike Pompeo, I filed cloture on Ric Grenell's nomination to 
serve as Ambassador to Germany. We will vote on this confirmation later 
this afternoon.
  So why don't we turn over a new leaf together and start rebuilding 
the comity and customs that ought to define our work here.
  Just yesterday, the Rules Committee held a very productive meeting 
that took a step in that direction. Colleagues from both sides of the 
aisle took a serious look at what we can do as a body to more 
efficiently fulfill our responsibilities in the appropriations process. 
That follows on a productive meeting I had with the Democratic leader, 
the Appropriations chairman, and the ranking member a few days ago.
  So I am hopeful about the prospects of moving forward together. We 
need to keep this momentum going and extend it--not just to 
appropriations but to nominations. This Congress has already made great 
progress implementing a pro-growth, pro-opportunity agenda for the 
middle-class, including historic tax relief for families and small 
businesses, but there is a lot more to do.
  That is how the Senate should be spending our time--exchanging ideas 
and fighting for the American public.

                          ____________________