[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 20, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Page S4956]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                              Nominations

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I heard the Republican leader on the floor 
just moments ago talking about the dismissal of some individuals by the 
Biden administration and their replacement, and his complaint that this 
violated the norms and the precedents of the U.S. Senate.
  There are certainly two words I would offer in response to that 
assertion: Merrick Garland.
  I would offer those words to the Republican leader as a reminder of 
what he did when there was a vacancy on the highest Court in the land, 
the U.S. Supreme Court. Antonin Scalia passed away, and a vacancy 
occurred. It was the last year of the Obama administration.
  Tradition suggested that that President of the United States, duly 
elected and in office, had the responsibility and the opportunity to 
fill the vacancy, and so he offered as his nominee Merrick Garland from 
the DC Circuit court.
  What happened to Merrick Garland's nomination? What was the norm and 
precedent? Well, there would be a hearing and a consideration of that 
nomination and a vote in the U.S. Senate.
  That process was stopped in its tracks by one leader, the Republican 
leader of the U.S. Senate from Kentucky.
  So when he talks about norms and precedents and creating and filling 
vacancies, he has forgotten that he made history in a very unusual way: 
by violating the most basic norm and precedent that the U.S. Senate had 
the responsibility to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. And the 
President of the United States, duly elected, was not a lameduck in the 
last year of his administration.
  The second issue which was raised by the Republican leader this 
morning dealt with the phrase ``defunding the police.'' I have rejected 
that phrase from the first time I heard it. I couldn't imagine anyone 
thinking that this was a sensible policy to follow when it came to the 
security of our homes and our communities.
  I can't speak for anybody else in the Senate, but in the awful 
circumstance when one is called on to dial 911, you certainly hope that 
the police will answer and that they will be there if they are needed. 
Defunding them lessens that possibility, and I am not a person who 
supports that.
  I want the very best police and law enforcement. I want them well 
trained, and I want them to follow norms and conduct that are 
respectful of American values. But defunding the police is not 
something I have ever embraced or ever will.
  But it is interesting to hear that argument from the Senator from 
Kentucky. He said that, in a way, you would be insulting and attacking 
the police by taking that position. One could argue that, but I would 
suggest to him that, in his position, stopping the creation of a 
commission to investigate what happened in this Chamber on January 6 
and what happened to 140 members of law enforcement in the Halls of the 
U.S. Capitol on the same day is not respectful of the police itself.
  We have had a plea--a direct plea from the men and women in uniform 
who guard us in this building to have an investigative commission 
determine what was behind that insurrectionist mob of January 6 and 
what we need to do to avoid it in the future. That commission and its 
prospects were stopped cold by the Republican leader from Kentucky. 
That is a fact.
  In terms of being respectful of law enforcement, allowing that 
commission to be created--a bipartisan commission--to get to the bottom 
of that horrible incident, that embarrassing incident in the history of 
the United States, is the least we can do to respond to what the police 
who guard us have asked for.
  I might add one other element while we are on the discussion of law 
enforcement and protecting America. We have a special security 
supplemental appropriation that was created by Senator Patrick Leahy of 
Vermont, the chairman of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, which 
appropriates the funds to pay the National Guard units who left their 
families and came here to protect us, and to pay the Capitol Police for 
the expenses they incurred on January 6 to fortify this Capitol against 
any future insurrectionist mob. That supplemental appropriations bill, 
which should have been passed routinely weeks ago, is still languishing 
for lack of agreement on the Republican side.
  If you want to be respectful of law enforcement, whether they are men 
and women in uniform, in police units, or the National Guard, wouldn't 
you pay them for the services they have rendered to protect this 
Capitol and to protect the United States of America?
  I call on the Republican leader: Instead of making a speech on the 
floor, call the Republican ranking member on the Senate Committee on 
Appropriations and ask him to waste no time in showing respect for law 
enforcement and to pass that security supplemental.


                Nomination of Kenneth Allen Polite, Jr.

  Mr. President, on another topic, this week, the Senate will vote on 
the nomination of Kenneth Polite. President Biden has nominated him to 
serve as Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department's 
Criminal Division.
  As an experienced prosecutor who has served his community throughout 
his career, Mr. Polite is certainly qualified for this important 
position. From 2013 to 2017, Mr. Polite served as the U.S. attorney for 
the Eastern District of Louisiana. While in this role, Mr. Polite's 
office prosecuted several large, violent, criminal organizations. He 
held local corrupt politicians accountable and stopped more human 
traffickers than during any prior U.S. attorney's term in office.
  Prior to serving the people of Louisiana, Mr. Polite served as an 
assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York, which is 
a very busy and important office. There, he took on organized crime, 
fought corruption, healthcare fraud, and identity theft.
  In addition to his extensive experience as a public servant, Mr. 
Polite also has a remarkable personal story. Born to teenage parents, 
he spent his youth in public housing projects in New Orleans before 
moving to the Lower Ninth Ward as a child. He graduated high school as 
the valedictorian of his class, and he went on to earn his 
undergraduate degree from Harvard and his law degree from the well-
respected Georgetown University. After law school, Mr. Polite initially 
went into private practice, but he was inspired to become a prosecutor 
after his half brother was tragically killed by gun violence.
  Throughout his career, Mr. Polite has always given back to the 
community that raised him. He has served on the boards of numerous 
community organizations and schools in New Orleans, and Mr. Polite's 
track record as an even-handed public servant has earned him support 
from across the aisle.
  In 2011, he was appointed by a Republican Governor of Louisiana, 
Bobby Jindal, to serve on the Louisiana Civil Service Commission.
  Then, last month, the Republican Attorney General of Louisiana, Jeff 
Landry, publicly voiced his support for Mr. Polite's nomination to this 
position in the Department of Justice. In a letter to the Senate 
Judiciary Committee, Mr. Landry wrote that, while serving as U.S. 
attorney, ``Mr. Polite was not only an effective crime fighter, but he 
was also an invaluable member of the community.''
  Mr. Polite is an outstanding nominee for this critical role at the 
Justice Department. You should have been in the Judiciary Committee, 
which the Presiding Officer serves on, when his nomination came up. The 
praise that he won from the two Republican Senators of Louisiana is an 
indication of this man's popularity and of his value to Louisiana and 
to our country. I hope that he will receive the same broad bipartisan 
support in the full Senate, and I urge my colleagues to join me in 
supporting Mr. Polite's nomination