[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 180 (Thursday, December 5, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Page S6826]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                     FBI Background Investigations

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I served on the Senate Judiciary Committee 
for over 20 years, including the last 4 as chairman.
  During that time, I voted on thousands of judicial U.S. attorneys, 
U.S. marshals, and Justice Department nominees.
  Every nominee who has gone through our committee--everyone--shares 
one thing in common, whether nominated by a Democrat or a Republican 
President, every single nominee has undergone an FBI background 
investigation--everyone.
  President-elect Trump has the right to nominate his preferred 
candidates for Justice Department and judicial vacancies, but the 
Judiciary Committee plays a critical role in offering advice and 
consent on nominations, which includes receiving and reviewing the 
results of FBI background investigations.
  After weeks of reports that President-elect Trump planned to bypass 
the FBI entirely, it was a relief to hear that the Trump transition 
team had finally signed an agreement this week to allow the FBI to 
conduct background investigations.
  But I remain concerned about whether President-elect Trump will 
require all his appointees to undergo the process. Listen to what the 
New York Times reported:

       Despite the signing of the agreement, it remains unclear 
     whether [the] Trump's team plans to send the names of all 
     officials requiring a security clearance or Senate 
     confirmation to the F.B.I. for vetting.

  If President-elect Trump's nominees are not required to submit to the 
same FBI vetting procedure as previous nominees, it makes you wonder 
what they are hiding.
  The practice of the FBI conducting background investigations is not a 
new idea. The nominations investigations of the President's nominees 
dates back 70 years to the Eisenhower administration, and it applies to 
every Senate-confirmed position, including more than 1,200 positions in 
the executive branch, 900 Federal judicial nominees, 93 U.S. attorney 
nominees, and 94 U.S. marshal nominees. Every single one is subject to 
an FBI investigation.
  You might ask yourself, Why is it so important to vet all these 
nominees? Consider the views of Noah Bookbinder and Gregg Nunziata, 
former Democratic and Republican counsels on the Senate Judiciary 
Committee, who, on a bipartisan basis, reviewed hundreds of nominees' 
background investigations.
  They wrote in the New York Times:

       Without nominees being scrutinized by the F.B.I., the 
     danger is that neither lawmakers nor the public would know 
     whether they are trustworthy or have issues that compromise 
     their ability to do the job or [even] their loyalty to the 
     United States.

  As Mr. Bookbinder and Nunziata noted in their op-ed:

       A nomination was never scheduled for committee 
     consideration without the committee receiving an F.B.I. 
     background check, reviewing it and clearing the nomination to 
     move forward.

  By design, positions that require Senate confirmation are of great 
importance. These individuals make critical decisions that protect 
America, our national security, and affect many thousands of American 
lives, including who is investigated, who is charged with a crime, and 
how the justice system operates.
  It is absolutely critical that people nominated to these positions 
are upstanding citizens who can be trusted with sensitive life-or-death 
government information, people who will be immune to blackmail or 
foreign influence and are truly loyal to the United States.
  President-elect Trump has reportedly considered using a private 
investigative firm to conduct these background investigations. That is 
unacceptable for one basic reason. First, when the nominees submit 
their paperwork to the FBI as a part of their background 
investigations, they are on notice that lying or concealing material 
facts is a felony--a felony. The same goes for individuals who agree to 
speak with the FBI about nominees' character and fitness. In 
comparison, there would be no penalties for misleading a private 
investigative firm.
  Second, the FBI's resources in determining if a nominee poses a risk 
far outweigh any private firm's capabilities. Seasoned agents at the 
FBI field offices nationwide are deployed to pull records, interview 
individuals, and report their findings.
  Finally, any private firm paid by the Trump transition team would 
have an unavoidable conflict of interest. They would have an incentive 
to clear the backgrounds of nominees so they would get more business 
from the transition team. By contrast, the only motive for FBI agents 
is honoring their oath to the Constitution.
  It is the duty of President-elect Trump to pick nominees of his 
choosing. It is also the duty of the Senate, under the Constitution, to 
carefully examine the record of each nominee before this body. To 
fulfill this constitutional duty of advice and consent on nominations, 
the Judiciary Committee must continue to receive background 
investigations conducted by the FBI for every single nominee.
  We owe the American people a transparent transition of power, but 
that is only possible if the incoming administration follows 
longstanding, established practices ensuring that the President's 
nominees can be trusted in a position of power.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior executive assistant clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.