[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 19]
[Senate]
[Pages 25969-25971]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



 NOMINATION OF WILLIAM P. JOHNSON, OF NEW MEXICO, TO BE UNITED STATES 
             DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report Calendar No. 599.
  The legislative clerk read the nomination of William P. Johnson, of 
New Mexico, to be United States District Judge for the District of New 
Mexico.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, have the yeas and nays been ordered?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not.
  Mr. LEAHY. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, I thank the distinguished majority leader, Mr. 
Daschle, and the distinguished deputy majority leader, Mr. Reid, who 
have worked so hard to get these nominations on the calendar so we can 
vote on them.
  William Johnson is the third Federal judge confirmed from New Mexico 
in

[[Page 25970]]

just the past few weeks. We expedited the consideration of Christina 
Armijo in October, who was confirmed last month; likewise, Harris 
Hartz, President Bush's nominee to the Tenth Circuit from New Mexico. I 
had a hearing at the end of October, and he was confirmed last week. 
All three of these nominees came to us with the strong support of both 
Senator Domenici and Senator Bingaman.
  I mention this because it is so helpful to our committee when the 
White House takes time to consult with both Senators from the home 
State and get their support. We got this kind of consensus: When we 
confirm Mr. Johnson, we are going to fill another judicial emergency 
vacancy. After that, we are going to another nominee, Clay Land, who 
has been supported by Senators Cleland and Miller. I mention this 
because if we confirm both these next 2, we will have confirmed 27 
Federal judges since July, when I took over the chairmanship, and 6 
court of appeals judges.
  To put that in perspective, since July, in those 5 months, we have 
confirmed as many as we confirmed all of the first year of the last 
President's administration--actually, a lot more judges in the courts 
of appeals.
  Everybody has been working very hard. I also mention to my 
colleagues, this morning we were finally able to get a quorum in the 
Judiciary Committee. We had 10 nominations go through, 5 of them 
judges, 5 other nominations from the Department of Justice, all of 
which will go now on the calendar.
  Mr. REID. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. LEAHY. Of course.
  Mr. REID. When did the Senator take over as chairman of the Judiciary 
Committee?
  Mr. LEAHY. I had a fully constituted committee I think it was in late 
July.
  Mr. REID. It is my understanding that following September 11, the 
Senator and his staff literally worked night and day for how long 
before the committee came up with an antiterrorism bill?
  Mr. LEAHY. We worked several weeks. It really was night and day. We 
had people going home at 2 o'clock in the morning and coming back at 5 
o'clock in the morning to do that. I was getting e-mails at home at 
3:30 in the morning from members of my staff and continued to do that 
until we got that bill out.
  Mr. REID. Will the Senator also answer this question: It is my 
understanding the committee's work was hampered as a result of the 
anthrax problem that occurred in Senator Daschle's office and in the 
Senator's office; is that true?
  Mr. LEAHY. The Senator from Nevada is right. We actually had to move 
much of the Judiciary staff out of the Dirksen Building. Some had been 
in the Hart Building in the proximity of the distinguished leader's 
office when the anthrax letter was opened. We were hampered by that 
because of medical treatment and still came to work.
  In fact, we went so far, as the Senator probably knows, as to hold 
hearings during the recesses to keep this going.
  Mr. REID. I was going to ask the Senator if he remembers another time 
when hearings were held regarding judges and other judicial matters 
during recess periods?
  Mr. LEAHY. I have only been on the committee 25 years, but I cannot 
remember a time during those 25 years--in fact, the Senator from Nevada 
may be interested in this. Maybe he was involved in this. Does the 
Senator recall the day that part of the Capitol Building was evacuated 
because of the anthrax scare and all the other buildings were 
evacuated? The distinguished Senator from West Virginia made available 
his conference room in the Appropriations Committee. We held hearings 
in that conference room on more judges as the building was being 
evacuated and held a markup in executive session with 150 of us crowded 
into one room in the back, the President's Room, to get even more 
judges out which then the distinguished majority leader put on the 
calendar within, I think, 24 hours of that time and we were voting on 
them a couple days after that.
  Mr. REID. The majority leader is in the Chamber, and I will not 
engage the Senator in any more dialog. Speaking for the people of 
Nevada and I think this country, when books are written over what 
transpired in this critical period of history, there is going to be a 
chapter on Pat Leahy and the tremendous job he did. It is precedent 
setting, and he has set a mark to which others will have to try to 
adhere.
  Mr. LEAHY. That means a great deal to me, and I appreciate that. I 
appreciate the help of Senators on both sides of the aisle in helping 
to move this forward.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. LEAHY. Yes.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I also commend the distinguished chair of the Judiciary 
Committee along the lines the assistant Democratic leader has noted. It 
is important at a time such as this that we recall for the record just 
what has transpired. The distinguished chairperson has been chairperson 
now for about 5 months, almost 6 months, and in one-half year's time, 
he has compiled a record that may at the end of this period actually 
exceed the number of judiciary appointments confirmed during the 
Clinton administration in an entire 12-month period of time in 1993. 
That is quite a remarkable accomplishment to exceed perhaps the number 
of judicial nominations in 6 months over and above what was confirmed 
in 1993 under a Democratic administration with, I might add, a 
Democratic Senate.
  Also, as the Senator from Nevada has noted, this has been an 
extraordinarily difficult time, filled with adversity. September 11, 
the anthrax attack, not only on the Senate and my office, but on the 
Senator's office itself--all of the disruption, the need for 
accelerated efforts on appropriations, and yet through all of that, 
with all of the work he had to do with counterterrorism, this Senator 
has very diligently, persistently, and with remarkable leadership 
brought us to this point.
  I publicly commend him, thank him, and tell him how proud I am for 
his effort and the work he has done to get us to this point.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. NICKLES. Will the Senator from Vermont yield?
  Mr. LEAHY. Of course, I will.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, to add to some of the statements that 
were made, I compliment my friend. He has assisted this Senator, and he 
has assisted other Senators, particularly on district court judges.
  If my numbers are correct, I believe we are now at 27 judges 
confirmed, which equals the number of judges that were confirmed in 
President Clinton's first year. President Clinton, nominated 47 
individuals for judicial positions, and the Senate confirmed 27 of 
those in his first year.
  President Bush has made 64 judicial nominations at a time when there 
are a great number of vacancies. We have now confirmed 27, and I hope 
we will confirm some more.
  I say to my friend and colleague from Vermont, we have done pretty 
well on district court judges. However, we are way behind on circuit 
judges. President Bush nominated eleven circuit court judges in May. Of 
those eleven, eight have not even had a hearing. One of these nominees 
is Miguel Estrada, who is a Honduras immigrant who graduated with 
honors from Columbia and graduated at the top of his law school class 
from Harvard.
  Another is John Roberts, again a Harvard Law School grad. Among his 
many accomplishments, Mr. Roberts has argued 34 cases before the 
Supreme Court. I might also mention that Mr. Estrada has argued 14 
cases before the Supreme Court. Both nominees are eminently qualified.
  I wonder if my friend and colleague from Vermont can tell us when we 
will begin considering or having hearings on some of these 
exceptionally qualified individuals, both rated unanimously well 
qualified by the ABA and who have bipartisan support, who were 
nominated in May of this year?
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the Senator from Oklahoma, my friend, has

[[Page 25971]]

talked to me about this on several occasions. We are trying to get 
through these calendars as quickly as we can. As I say, I have only 
been here as chairman for 5 months. Actually, there were a number of 
nominees prior to my becoming chairman who never got a hearing at the 
beginning of this year.
  We will have had far more courts of appeals judges than I think have 
ever been, or I can remember going through in a President's first year 
in office. We are going way beyond what the Senate usually does. It is 
certainly a much faster pace than the Senate has had in the last 4, 5, 
6 years.
  If we can slow down a little bit the things that are happening around 
here--anthrax, September 11, all the things we wish we did not have--if 
the chairman of the committee could deal with just a few less death 
threats--not from my friend from Oklahoma. The anthrax letter did not 
have an Oklahoma return address, nor would I expect it to.
  Mr. NICKLES. I appreciate it.
  Mr. LEAHY. We are moving through them. We have done Fifth Circuit 
Judge Clement, Second Circuit Judge Parker, Fourth Circuit Judge 
Gregory. I mentioned from New Mexico a circuit judge.
  Mr. NICKLES. If the Senator will yield, we have confirmed six circuit 
court judges, but in this particular instance, the President has made 
many more circuit court nominees during his first year in office than 
any recent time in history. In fact, 28 have been nominated. I urge my 
colleague--and I will stop here--to have more hearings, especially for 
some of these individuals nominated in May. They are outstanding 
individuals.
  I am more than certain that once they have their hearings, they will 
be confirmed by an overwhelming majority, both in the committee and on 
the floor of the Senate. I urge the chairman to have hearings on those 
individuals as soon as possible.
  Mr. LEAHY. The Senator from Oklahoma asks an appropriate question. I 
can assure him we are trying to move through as many as we can. I hope, 
for example, the President will nominate more district judges, too. 
There are about 77 percent district court vacancies; about 77 percent 
do not even have a nominee. There is a real problem and we will work 
with the administration.
  Some of the slowdowns have been taken care of, as the Senator from 
Oklahoma knows. We had a number of judges who were held up because the 
White House did not directly answer the question whether they had been 
arrested or convicted in the last 10 years. We thought that was at 
least a worthwhile thing to know for someone getting a lifetime 
appointment. I think the White House might have realized it made sense 
and allowed them to answer the question, and it broke a logjam. We had 
10 nominations, 5 judges, that went through this morning. My intention 
is to keep moving as rapidly as we can.
  I ask the distinguished acting Republican leader, we could have 
rollcalls on the next two judges, or if he has no objection, I would 
ask we do them by voice vote. If he would like rollcalls, that is his 
right.
  Mr. NICKLES. Senators want to get to the Defense authorization bill. 
There is no reason we cannot. I am sure it is not necessary to have a 
recorded vote. A voice vote is more than acceptable for the other two 
judges. I thank my friend and colleague and look forward to having a 
hearing on Mr. Estrada. Forty-nine Senators have requested a hearing on 
Mr. Estrada and on Mr. Roberts and other nominees for the circuit 
court. As soon as we get hearings, it would be much appreciated.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, since the topic of the Judiciary 
Committee's record on judicial confirmations was raised, I would like 
to take just a minute to make an observation.
  As everyone here knows, I do not like to engage in the typical 
statistics judo that seems to be intrinsic to this issue. But I do want 
everyone to understand that, despite the progress that was just 
mentioned, we really have a lot more work to do.
  Look at the percentages: The Senate has exercised its advice and 
consent duty on only 21 percent of President Bush's circuit nominees 
this year. The other 79 percent of our work remains unfinished. And our 
overall record is not much better: the Senate has confirmed only 37.5 
percent of all judicial nominations we received from President Bush. We 
will conclude our work by leaving nearly 100 vacancies in the judicial 
branch.
  Now, these facts are not escaping wider attention outside the 
Judiciary Committee. Last week, Vice President Cheney sent a letter 
noting that ``vacancies on the Federal bench are occurring at a faster 
pace than the confirmations of new judges, and barely one in four of 
President Bush's nominees has received a hearing and a vote.'' The 
Washington Post editorialized on November 30 that the committee should 
hold more judicial nominations hearings, concluding that, ``[f]ailing 
to hold them in a timely fashion damages the judiciary, disrespects the 
President's power to name judges and is grossly unfair to often well-
qualified nominees.'' And the Wall Street Journal observed on November 
27 that there is a ``pattern of judicial obstruction that has left 108 
current vacancies on the Federal bench. . . . With only days to go 
before the Senate adjourns for the year, only 28 percent of George W. 
Bush's nominees have been confirmed.''
  Of course, the reason why people are taking notice is that the 
process of advice and consent on the President's judicial nominations 
is not a game. This is not football or baseball, and the goal here is 
not a particular set of numbers. These are nominations for very 
important positions in the Federal Government, and it is the Senate's 
constitutional obligation to review them. Despite the work that we have 
done, there is simply no escaping the fact that we are about to stop 
work for the year with a judicial vacancy rate of 11.3 percent, which I 
believe is unacceptable by any measure. And, by the way, there is 
absolutely no point in accusing the administration of not sending more 
nominations to us, when we have made it clear that we will not devote 
any effort at all to reviewing 30 of the nominations the President did 
send.
  All this being said, however, I have reason to look forward to 
hitting the ground running next year. The Judiciary Committee's obvious 
focus on confirming nearly the same number of judges as we did 
President Clinton's first year, reassures me. After all, during 
President Clinton's second year in office, the Senate confirmed 100 of 
his judicial nominees. I fully expect that we will do the same for 
President George W. Bush, in fact, I take it as a pledge that we will 
confirm 100 Bush nominees in 2002.
  Mr. LEAHY. I did not request a rollcall vote. I ask for a voice vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Stabenow). The question is, Will the 
Senate advise and consent to the nomination of William P. Johnson to be 
United States District Judge for the District of New Mexico?
  The nomination was confirmed.

                          ____________________