[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 4583-4584]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         JUDICIAL CONFIRMATIONS

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition today to speak 
about three subjects: One, judicial confirmations; secondly, the budget 
resolution; and thirdly, the housing situation.
  First, as to the confirmation of judges, through staff, I have 
notified the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Committee that I 
intended to address this subject, and the theme of my comments is that 
we ought to be moving ahead on judicial confirmations.
  We have a situation where there has not been one confirmation of a 
Federal judge this year. Since September 25th of last year, there has 
only been one hearing for a circuit judge, and that was on February 21, 
in the midst of a recess. There have only been two hearings that 
included district court judges, the one on February 12 and one other. 
Six nominees have been heard; four are on the agenda for this week's 
executive business meeting.
  The comparison between what has happened with President Bush and 
President Clinton shows a decisive imbalance which requires prompt 
action by the Senate on the confirmation of President Bush's judges. 
During the last 2 years of President Clinton's administration, 15 
circuit judges were confirmed compared to six for the last 2 years, so 
far, of the Bush Administration. During the last 2 years of President 
Clinton's administration, 57 district judges were confirmed compared to 
only 34 during the Bush Administration.
  On the 8-year cycle for President Clinton, 65 circuit judges were 
confirmed and 305 district judges. And so far, during President Bush's 
two terms,

[[Page 4584]]

57 circuit judges have been confirmed and 237 district judges have been 
confirmed.
  Now, the statistics can be argued in many ways, but I think it is 
hard to overcome the basic conclusion that it is unacceptable to have 
no confirmations of a Federal judge in the entire year, so far, in 
2008. Three months have expired. It is unsatisfactory to have only one 
hearing for a circuit judge in the past 6 months, and last year only 
four circuit judges were given hearings.
  Now, regrettably, this pattern has evolved over the past two decades. 
During the last 2 years of President Reagan's administration, the 
Senate was controlled by the opposite party and there was a stall. 
Then, during the last 2 years of President George H.W. Bush, the first 
President Bush, again during the last 2 years of his administration, 
judges were stalled. Republicans retaliated with gusto during the last 
6 years of President Clinton's administration and exacerbated the 
warfare on judges following what the Democrats had done.
  And, as we have seen in 2005, this Chamber was virtually cast asunder 
by the battle on the Democratic filibusters and the threat of a nuclear 
option or constitutional option to change the filibuster rules. It was 
open warfare in this Chamber, until it was finally worked out through 
the so-called Gang of 14. Now we have a desperate situation where 
judicial emergencies exist in many of these courts, and the Senate is 
not acting to confirm judges to fill those seats.
  The Washington Post has editorialized on the subject to this effect. 
In December of 2007, the Post said:
       [T]he Senate should act in good faith to fill vacancies--
     not as a favor to the president but out of respect for the 
     residents, businesses, defendants and victims of crime in the 
     region the 4th Circuit covers. Two nominees--Mr. Conrad and 
     Steve A. Matthews--should receive confirmation hearings as 
     soon as possible.

  The Post further editorialized about another Fourth Circuit nominee:

       [B]locking Mr. Rosenstein's confirmation hearing . . . 
     would elevate ideology and ego above substance and merit, and 
     it would unfairly penalize a man who people on both sides of 
     this question agree is well qualified for a judgeship.

  What we are dealing with is not just politics in the Senate. We are 
dealing with the rights of residents--as noted by the Washington Post, 
of businesses, of defendants and victims of crime--who are affected by 
the failure to move ahead and confirm judges. That, I suggest, is 
totally unacceptable.
  I emphasize the blame rests on both parties, as this pattern has 
unfolded over the past two decades. Each time it has been exacerbated, 
it has intensified. I supported qualified judges during the 
administration of President Clinton because I thought it was 
inappropriate to tie them up. I thought the Democratic President was 
correct in seeking confirmation of his judges. Now I believe the 
Republican caucus is correct in saying it is inappropriate to block the 
confirmation of Federal judges, especially when no judge has been 
confirmed yet this year to the Federal courts and only one circuit 
court nomination hearing has been held in the past 6 months.
  It is my hope that we will find a way to declare a truce. We have an 
election coming up in November. It may well be that there will be a 
change of parties--or not. It may well be that, unless a truce is 
declared, the opposite party will have sufficient votes through 
filibusters or otherwise to stop judicial nominations. It hurts the 
country. It hurts the people who are trying to get their cases decided. 
It hurts litigants.
  The judicial process is fundamental in our society, and it is being 
thwarted by the tactics which have become business as usual in the 
Senate. I hope we will be able to resolve this matter. I hope we will 
be able to declare a truce. There is consideration being given to a 
variety of responses to this kind of conduct by the majority, and we 
all know any one Senator can tie up this body unilaterally because this 
place functions on unanimous consent and waivers of a lot of technical 
rules. That would be, perhaps, even more disastrous. But, we have to 
find a way out of this, I suggest, because it is totally unacceptable 
to continue as it is running today.
  Mr. President, I now ask that the Congressional Record contain a 
separate caption for what I am about to say, under a resolution which I 
am about to submit to change the budget process.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The remarks of Mr. Specter pertaining to the submission of S. Res. 
493 are located in today's Record under ``Submission of Concurrent and 
Senate Resolutions.'')

                          ____________________