[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 5369-5370]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                POLITICIZATION OF THE NOMINATION PROCESS

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, our Constitution has vested the Senate 
with the responsibility of advising and consenting on the President's 
nominations.
  Throughout the full range of administration appointments--from top 
Cabinet officials, to Federal judges, to boards and commissions--the 
Senate's role is to speak for the American people and ensure the 
highest standards of public service are maintained throughout our 
Government.
  We have exercised this oversight authority with extraordinary 
restraint. Democrats have sought to participate in the nomination 
process and work together with the administration and the majority in a 
bipartisan fashion to confirm public servants in the highest traditions 
of our Nation.
  Regrettably, the administration has chosen to reject the course of 
bipartisanship, even though Democrats have tried to accommodate the 
President's goal of filling judicial vacancies. The Senate has 
confirmed a record 173 Federal judges, rejecting only 3.
  These three judges were far outside the mainstream and had troubling 
records of judicial activism in service to extreme ideology. They were 
rejected for that reason.
  In spite of the Senate's judgment, the President has chosen to take 
the unprecedented step of using recess appointments to bypass the 
Senate on two occasions. First, in order to appoint Charles Pickering 
to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. And second, to appoint William 
Pryor to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
  At no point has a President ever used a recess appointment to install 
a rejected nominee on to the Federal bench. And there are intimations 
that there will be even more recess appointments in the coming months.
  These actions not only poison the nomination process, but they strike 
at the heart of the principle of checks and balances that is one of the 
pillars of the American democracy.
  This cannot continue. What is at stake here is not just a few 
nominations. What is at stake is the Senate's obligation to represent 
the American people and check unrestrained executive power.
  This White House is insisting on a radical departure from historic 
and constitutional practices. They have broken the process and we want 
to fix it.
  And we stand ready to fix it. I have spoken to the majority leader 
about my serious concerns.
  Let us be clear: We will continue to cooperate in the confirmation of 
Federal judges, but only if the White House gives us assurances that it 
will no longer abuse the process and that it will once again respect 
our Constitution's essential system of checks and balances.
  Sadly, this is not the only area in which the administration has 
chosen to cast aside traditions of bipartisanship and cooperation.
  One of the minority's less visible yet vital responsibilities is the 
naming of Democratic candidates to sit on government boards and 
commissions.
  These boards span the entire range of government responsibilities, 
from engaging young people in community and national service, to 
overseeing financial markets, to supervising the security of America's 
nuclear facilities, to protecting Americans from illegal energy company 
price-gouging.
  They may not get a lot of headlines, but the public servants who sit 
on these boards perform an extraordinary service to their Nation and 
have a direct influence on the security, prosperity, health, and well-
being of the American people.
  Once again, Democrats have tried to work in a bipartisan fashion. In 
the 108th congress alone, we have confirmed 419 of the President's 
nonjudicial nominations.
  Because of the importance of these boards, many have a statutory 
requirement of bipartisanship. Others have bipartisan participation by 
long-established practice.
  Their purpose is not simply to serve one party or another, or the 
administration in power at the moment, but the entire Nation. In order 
to provide our Nation with responsible stewardship, these boards must 
resist political manipulation and partisan divisions.
  For decades, the nomination and confirmation process has honored the 
unique and vital role of these boards and commissions. During the 
Clinton administration, for instance, Republican nominations were 
considered and approved, even when the nominees were outspoken 
opponents of administration policy.
  The same was true during the administrations for Ronald Reagan and 
George H.W. Bush.
  During the current administration, however, that standard has been 
cast aside. And a divisive form of political gamesmanship has been 
allowed to extend to the nomination process. Talented candidates are 
being prevented from serving their Nation. The views and communities 
they represent are not being heard. And the American people are losing 
out as a result.

[[Page 5370]]

  Among the candidates rejected by the administration are potential 
nominees to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Equal 
Employment Opportunity Commission, the Export-Import Bank, the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, the Corporation for National and 
Community Service, and many more.
  Let me give you a brief background on just a few of these rejected 
candidates.
  For instance, Warren Stern. Early in 2003, Mr. Stern was recommended 
to serve in the Democratic position on the Defense Nuclear Facilities 
Board. Shortly afterward, he was rejected on the grounds that he did 
not have ``enough scientific background.''
  The charge is absurd on its face. Mr. Stern has degrees in physics, 
nuclear engineering, and national security studies. He was selected as 
the State Department's Senior coordinator for Nuclear Safety, and he 
coordinates the work of the Department of Energy and the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission in the field of international nuclear safety 
policy.
  Last July, while his nomination was supposed to be under 
consideration at the White House, the State Department conferred upon 
him the Superior Honor Award, for ``developing and implementing a 
diplomatic and technical strategy for the control of dangerous 
radioactive materials.''
  At a time when our intelligence community tells us that America's 
nuclear facilities are being targeted by terrorists, Mr. Stern brings 
an extraordinary range and depth of experience that will make America 
safer. But he is being denied the chance to serve for no reason.
  Take Dr. Chon Noriega. Dr. Noriega was nominated in March of 2003 to 
the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. He was recommended because 
Democrats believe that Public Broadcasting can do much more to reach 
out to America's growing Hispanic community.
  As the Nation's foremost academic authority on Hispanic media, Dr. 
Noriega is uniquely suited to help the Corporation for Public 
Broadcasting achieve this goal. Dr. Noriega is the Associate Director 
of UCLA's Chicano Studies Research Center and the author of eight books 
on the topic of Hispanic media.
  America's Hispanic community could have no more passionate or 
effective advocate than Dr. Noriega. Yet the administration has once 
again refused to nominate a superbly qualified candidate, and the 
Nation's largest minority community has one less advocate as a result.
  Finally, and perhaps most absurdly, is the administration's refusal 
to nominate Judge Patricia Wald to the Legal Services Corporation. 
Judge Wald served on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District 
of Columbia for 20 years, the last 5 as its chief judge.
  After her retirement from the circuit court, she was asked to serve 
as a judge on the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former 
Yugoslavia.
  Judge Wald is a brilliant jurist, whose probity, integrity, and 
commitment to the American legal system are unassailable. So respected 
is she that just last month, President Bush asked her to sit on the 
commission investigating the collection and use of intelligence leading 
up to the Iraqi War.
  If she can be trusted with the responsibility of restoring confidence 
in the intelligence system on which America's security depends, surely 
she is qualified and trustworthy enough to help extend legal 
representation to Americans who cannot afford it.
  Democrats have tried to work together with the administration to 
continue the bipartisan process of nominations, both for boards and for 
the Federal bench.
  Repeatedly, we have asked the administration to conduct the 
nomination process in a bipartisan manner, and we have been denied.
  The administration has crossed a line and it is time it pulls back. 
We can no longer stand by and watch this critical aspect of our 
responsibilities be undermined by the intrusion of partisan politics.
  Whether it is a nomination to a board or a lifetime appointment to 
the Federal bench, we cannot allow the Senate's role to be disregarded.
  Once we have confidence that the integrity of this process is 
restored, Democrats will be accommodating to the White House's 
nominations.
  We hoped for a different result, but the administration has left us 
no choice. I ask my Republican colleagues to reach out to 
administration officials and urge them to return this process to its 
traditions of bipartisanship and cooperation.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The deputy Democratic leader is 
recognized.
  Mr. REID. Before the Democratic leader leaves the floor, Mr. 
President, through you to the distinguished Senator from South Dakota, 
is it true we have approved 173 Federal judges during the time 
President Bush has been President?
  Mr. DASCHLE. As of this day, March 26, I answer the Senator from 
Nevada, we have approved 173 judges and 419 nonjudicial nominations by 
this administration. I don't know whether the nontraditional 
nominations is some kind of record over 3 years, but we now know the 
judicial record of 173 has not been equaled.
  So the answer is yes, we have cooperated as fully as any Congress has 
in accommodating an administration with regard to appointments it 
considers to be of value to the country. We are only asking for similar 
consideration of the nominations and a recognition of the importance of 
the constitutional process of advise and consent, which is why I 
expressed the concern this morning about the recess appointments of 
those judges who have not been confirmed in the Senate.
  Mr. REID. I also ask, through the Chair to the distinguished 
Democratic leader, it is also true, is it not, that 173 judges have 
been approved; we have been, through your direction, very selective and 
turned down five, two of whom the President has done an unusual thing 
of making recess appointments. So right now, there are I believe three 
who have in effect been turned down.
  Mr. DASCHLE. The Senator is correct. There have only been 3 out of 
173 now that have not been given the authority to serve on the bench 
and, as I said, for good reason--either their unwillingness to 
cooperate with the nominating process or fulfill their obligation to 
provide information regarding their positions, or the fact that they 
have clearly demonstrated extreme positions on issues that fall way 
outside the mainstream of philosophical thinking and prevented their 
confirmation.
  The Senator is correct: 173 is the accurate number today.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent--and if I am out of 
line, the Chair in his capacity as the Senator from the State of Alaska 
can object--to speak for up to 15 minutes in morning business rather 
than 10.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________