[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Page 11937]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           JUDICIAL NOMINEES

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, seeing the occupant of the Chair and 
realizing he is new to the Senate and learning the process here, I 
think the majority leader had it right. One thing that is important for 
everyone to remember is that in the Senate, if you are here for a 
while, sooner or later the shoe is on the other foot. The position you 
are in today is the position your adversary may be in very soon in the 
future. So the precedents we set in the Senate are extremely important.
  The majority leader and I, as he indicated this morning, talked about 
this issue at the beginning of the session and we agreed that the 
process of confirming circuit court judges had become entirely too 
contentious, and it was largely a waste of time to try to cast blame as 
to who was most at fault in that situation developing. To the maximum 
extent possible, we agreed we wanted to have a clean, fresh start that 
would honor the traditions of the Senate.
  A good way to look at it is to look at the last three Presidents. 
Each of them in the last 2 years of their tenure in office had a Senate 
controlled by the opposition party. So the question is, how did the 
opposition party in the Senate treat the President on circuit court 
nominees? Looking at the statistics, President Bush, 41; President 
Clinton and President Bush, 43; and we will see how he comes out, 
President Bush, President Clinton, and President Reagan, there were an 
average of 17 circuit court judges confirmed in similar situations.
  The majority leader, in one of our discussions on the floor back in 
February, said:

       This is not our last circuit court judge, but the first of 
     a significant number who can at least meet the standards of 
     Congresses similarly situated as ours.

  That was an accurate public reflection by the majority leader back in 
February of the numerous conversations he and I have had, both publicly 
and privately, about the standard we ought to achieve here in this 
Congress. I think that is a standard that can still be met. Three 
circuit judges have been confirmed this year--a little slower process 
than frankly I had thought, particularly since we are in the early part 
of the Congress where presumably it would be more easily done than 
later. The majority leader was entirely correct, and I commend him, for 
referring to the gesture the President made at the beginning of this 
Congress about not resubmitting four or five highly contentious 
nominees that it is clear the new Democratic majority, as well as the 
Democratic minority in the past, did not want to see confirmed. The 
President took those off the table, sent up new nominees, and most of 
them are completely without controversy. One of them will have a 
hearing beginning at 10 o'clock this morning, and how that turns out 
and how that individual is treated will tell us a lot about where we 
are going to be able to go from here to achieve the standard the 
majority leader referred to that he and I wish to meet for this 
Congress.
  I thank my friend from Nevada for his observations. I agree with 
them. I think they accurately reflect our mutual desire here to have 
this Congress do no worse than the last three Congresses--this Senate--
in the last 2 years with Presidents of the opposite party. It is a 
standard that can be met. It is a standard that should be met.
  One day, in spite of the best efforts of people like myself, there 
will be a Democratic President. One of the things we know around here 
is that precedents established and lessons learned are hard to undo. So 
I say to our good friends on the other side, heed the advice of the 
majority leader. It is in your best interests for us to have a less 
contentious and more successful treatment of circuit judges during this 
Congress.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________