[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 9882-9887]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    NOMINATION OF JANE HOLL LUTE TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF HOMELAND 
                                SECURITY

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to Calendar No. 57, the nomination of Jane Holl Lute.
  The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Jane Holl 
Lute, of New York, to be Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise to express my unqualified 
endorsement of Jane Holl Lute to be Deputy Secretary for the Department 
of Homeland Security.
  Mrs. Lute has impressive educational credentials--including a Ph.D. 
from Stanford, a J.D. from Georgetown, and 3 years as a professor at 
West Point--an outstanding professional history, and broad national 
security and management experience, all of which is more than ample 
preparation for the position to which she has been nominated.
  She had a distinguished career in the military, served as the 
European specialist at the National Security Council during the first 
Bush and Clinton administrations, and for the past several years has 
worked in various positions with United Nations Peacekeeping 
Operations.
  Mrs. Lute joined the Army right out of college and spent the next 16 
years serving in a variety of capacities, including as an action 
officer in Operation Desert Storm, U.S. Army Central Command, Riyadh; 
as company commander, U.S. Signal Command, a brigade signal officer; 
and as director for european affairs on the National Security Council 
for President George H.W. Bush and President Bill Clinton. Her military 
experience with signals intelligence and on the National Security 
Council has helped prepare her for the intelligence and 
counterterrorism missions of DHS.
  Since 2003, she has served in a variety of senior leadership 
positions with the U.N., including as the Assistant Secretary-General 
of Peacekeeping Operations, and most recently as the Assistant 
Secretary General for Peacekeeping Support in the Executive Office of 
the Secretary-General of the U.N.
  As Assistant Secretary-General, Mrs. Lute has managed a very large 
and complex Peacekeeping workforce, with responsibility for hundreds of 
thousands of military and civilian personnel in over 30 countries, 
including hotspots such as Kosovo, the Congo, and Darfur, to name just 
a few. This was no small accomplishment. Her leadership helped to 
ensure the security and welfare of people around the globe living in 
unaccommodating and hostile circumstances.
  She also managed multibillion-dollar budgets and welcomed oversight 
and constructive criticism of her department, in an organization that 
many have described as ``openly hostile'' to such transparency.
  At the U.N., she managed support operations for the second largest 
deployed military force in the world, and oversaw a multibillion 
budget, which grew from $2 billion to nearly $8 billion annually. She 
undertook a variety of initiatives to improve the management and 
financial accountability of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, 
which included instituting a requirements review panel for acquisitions 
and a mission startup monitoring process.
  When she noticed that the U.N. was short on the procurement personnel 
with the language skills and expertise needed for the complex 
transactions they would work on, she helped institute a program to 
identify, recruit, and train additional staff.
  She also instituted advanced training programs for senior 
administrative and management personnel, in response to deficiencies 
she observed.
  I am particularly impressed by Mrs. Lute's leadership and management 
experience in a career dedicated to public service. In her testimony 
before the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee last 
week, it was apparent that her experiences have helped her develop into 
the leader she is today: One who recognizes that, in her own words, 
``people are the most important resource any . . . organization has.''
  It is a testimony to Mrs. Lute and her work that the committee has 
received numerous letters supporting her nomination. Letters have come 
from the International Association of Emergency Managers, the National 
Emergency Managers Association, the International Association of Fire 
Chiefs, the Major Cities Chiefs, the National Sheriffs' Association, 
Lee Baca, the Sheriff of L.A. County, Lee Hamilton, former congressman 
and current President and Director, Woodrow Wilson International Center 
for Scholars, HRH Prince Zeid Ra'ad Al-Hussein, Jordan's Ambassador to 
the U.S., and many others.
  Managing the Department of Homeland Security is no small task, 
demanding a smart and steady hand. The Deputy Secretary post carries 
with it diverse responsibilities that range from overseeing 
preparations to respond to a nuclear terrorist attack to ensuring that 
DHS employees have adequate office space.
  DHS has at times struggled to gain solid footing over the course of 
its six-year lifespan. Each year it becomes stronger, I am happy to 
note. And I don't think there is any question that the country is safer 
as a result of the Department's efforts.
  But the Department has a difficult and varied mission and its work is 
central to the security of all Americans. So we must continue to press 
forward to improve upon its capabilities.
  To that end, I am working to draft the Senate's first authorization 
bill for the Department as a means of laying out what I believe should 
be its priorities and to make the Department more efficient and 
effective in its missions. Needless to say, we will be seeking input 
from the administration.
  One of the biggest problems the Department faces is its management of 
acquisitions. Some of the Department's largest and most troubled 
acquisition programs--Deepwater, SBINet, radiation detection portal 
monitors--need stronger oversight and more decisive leadership than 
they have gotten in the past.
  Furthermore, the Department's heavy reliance on contractors to 
perform basic services raises serious questions about whether DHS is 
building sufficient internal capacity and institutional knowledge. 
Right now, DHS still has insufficient capacity to develop requirements 
and evaluate the technical feasibility of contractors' proposals.
  In recent years the United States has seen serious threats to our 
cyber networks and we have not yet developed

[[Page 9883]]

the tools to detect and defend against these threats. Due to the 
vulnerabilities that still exist, we have experienced massive identity 
theft, monetary loss, and leaks of sensitive information. Moreover, if 
these vulnerabilities are ever fully exploited, there is the potential 
to do significant damage to our Nation's critical infrastructure. The 
Department of Homeland Security has the important responsibility of 
leading Federal efforts to protect domestic cyber networks, both public 
and private. The Department has made some progress in developing its 
capabilities in this area, but much more work remains to be done. I 
look forward to working with Mrs. Lute to bolster the nation's cyber 
security.
  Clearly, our southern border security has also become a central focus 
for the Department and the Obama administration. Senator Collins and I 
successfully amended the budget resolution this week to add $550 
million for the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice to help 
stem the flow of drugs and people moving north into the U.S. and guns 
and money moving south into Mexico. I look forward to a close 
collaboration with the Department in this area.
  The Department faces many other challenges that must be met and 
conquered if it is to succeed in its ultimate mission of protecting the 
nation from terrorism and natural disasters. This committee has always 
worked cooperatively with the Department and will continue to do so to 
ensure its success.
  If confirmed, Mrs. Lute will play a large part in setting the 
Department on course to overcome these challenges. I want to thank her 
for her many years of service and say that I believe she is 
exceptionally qualified to take on DHS' challenges. I urge my fellow 
Senators to support her confirmation.
  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, Jane Holl Lute has been nominated to 
become the Deputy Secretary for Management at the Department of 
Homeland Security, (DHS). If confirmed, she would be responsible for 
the following at DHS: budget, appropriations, expenditure of funds, 
accounting and finance; procurement; human resources and personnel; 
information technology systems; facilities, property, equipment, and 
other material resources; and performance measurements tracking.
  After reviewing the parts of her U.N. record that had to be leaked 
for any of us to know about it, it is clear that Ms. Lute is either not 
qualified or not experienced to manage the DHS. When pressed to explain 
the mismanagement, fraud, and corruption that took place under her 
watch at U.N. Peacekeeping Operations, Ms. Lute consistently diverted 
blame to other U.N. officials or departments--making it appear she 
really didn't manage much of the U.N. If accurate, she is not 
experienced. When pressed to explain how she is experienced enough to 
manage DHS, Ms. Lute then claims she was at the center of Peacekeeping 
Operations, managed the internal operations--making it appear that she 
was responsible for everything. If accurate, this means she is also 
responsible for the mismanagement and waste. Ms. Lute cannot have it 
both ways.
  An overall assessment of Peacekeeping Operations is that they are 
saturated in fraud and abuse.
  In 2007 and 2008, the U.N. Procurement Task Force, a branch of the 
U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services, OIOS, issued several 
reports that had to be leaked in order for anyone outside the U.N. to 
know about them.
  The reports were based on investigations related to U.N. peacekeeping 
management and procurement that uncovered a significant amount of 
corruption, fraud, waste, overpayments, abuse, negligence and 
mismanagement in a number of high value contracts. This reflects a lack 
of an internal control system within U.N. Peacekeeping procurement 
under Ms. Lute's management.\1\
  The findings of the U.N. audit reports are alarming.
  For example, the reports found 43 percent of mostly U.N. peacekeeping 
procurement tainted by fraud. Out of $1.4 billion in U.N. contracts 
internally investigated, $610 million was tainted by 10 ``significant 
fraud and corruption schemes.'' \2\ Since 43 percent of the procurement 
contracts are tainted and the U.S. taxpayer contributes up to 26 
percent of all U.N. funding, it is safe to say the entire U.S. 
contribution in this case was tainted by corruption an waste.
  ``Total disregard for controls'' is how the task force described 
senior U.N. officials involved in peacekeeping procurement fraud.\3\ In 
an environment of no controls, Ms. Lute's Peacekeeping Operations 
suffered from numerous problems that greatly increased the cost of 
operations or lost resources altogether.
  Specific examples listed in the report include criminal acts such as 
bribery and kickback schemes, overpayments to vendors, lack of 
competitive bidding, lack of acquisition plans, lack of qualified 
procurement staff, splitting single contracts apart to avoid reporting 
requirements, transactions with no contract in place, unauthorized 
contracts issued, use of uneconomical contractors, unnecessary 
expenditures, and dysfunctional asset and property management.
  The task force found that significant Peacekeeping missions lacked 
``indicators of achievement and performance measures'' for the 
political and civilian affairs components of operations. Specifically, 
roles and responsibilities were not formally established, and there 
were no defined reporting lines and accountability.\4\
  The task force reports that a major roadblock to its investigation is 
due to ``limited cooperation'' from U.N. staff and vendors due to the 
lack of a compulsory process for obtaining documents and testimony.\5\
  Even after the task force exposed Peacekeeping mismanagement, 
peacekeeping and procurement management were not ``consistent in 
applying the standards to which they are supposed to hold staff 
accountable.'' \6\
  For each of its audits and investigations, the task force made 
recommendations to Ms. Lute and her U.N. Peacekeeping team on how to 
address the serious fraud and mismanagement issues. A number of 
critical recommendations were not accepted.\7\
  Regarding Peacekeeping procurement, Ms. Lute tries to have it both 
ways by diverting blame but also claiming she still has procurement 
experience.
  When asked at her nomination hearing about the procurement corruption 
under her watch, Ms. Lute claimed that the corruption and mismanagement 
was not her fault but the fault of procurement staff in the field.
  Since she indicated at the hearing that she had little or no 
responsibility for the Peacekeeping procurement, Ms. Lute was asked in 
her questions for the record what other procurement experience she had 
that would qualify her for managing procurement at DHS. Her written 
response reveals that Ms. Lute was much more responsible for 
Peacekeeping procurement than she admitted at the hearing. She wrote in 
her response that she had ``responsibility for oversight of personnel 
responsible for directly engaging and supervising the provision of 
contract services.''
  Another indication that Ms. Lute has a much larger role and influence 
on Peacekeeping procurement than she admitted at her hearing is how she 
pushed through a no-bid contract for her mission to Darfur in 2007. In 
2007, Lute personally steered a $250 million no-bid contract for U.N. 
peacekeeping in Darfur to a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin.
  At the time, the Officer-in-Charge of the U.N. Department of 
Management where much of the U.N.'s procurement took place sent Ms. 
Lute a memo responding to her charges that Peacekeeping procurement 
problems was the fault of the U.N. Department of Management.
  While the Department of Management has many faults and has an equally 
tarnished record within the U.N., the comments in the memo are telling 
in that they reinforce the findings of several OIOS and Procurement 
Task Force reports.
  According to the memo, Ms. Lute failed to plan for the Darfur 
peacekeeping mission which led to sole

[[Page 9884]]

source contracting despite having 18 months to prepare. The memo also 
indicates Ms. Lute failed the preparedness test by not having a 
logistics concept in place to embark on a logistics delivery capability 
at short notice that will also meet U.N. procurement rules. Finally, 
the memo states that the delays in startup of the mission were due to 
Ms. Lute constantly changing mission requirements. According to the 
memo, these delays ``constitute a pattern, to which oversight bodies of 
the U.N. may be less charitable towards and may well find the pattern 
as troubling.''
  In a 2008 OIOIS Procurement Task Force report, U.N. auditors 
expressed concerns that based on prior audits and investigations that 
Peacekeeping Operations will face a ``higher-risk exposure to 
mismanagement, fraud and corruption'' as a result of the no-bid 
contract requested by Ms. Lute.\8\
  It is also important to point out that almost the entire U.N. shares 
concerns about what Ms. Lute did with this contract. In 2007, the U.N. 
General Assembly voted 142 to 1, sadly with only the United States 
dissenting, to express concern about the no-bid contract \9\
  Even though Ms. Lute claimed at her hearing that she had little 
responsibility in contracting decisions or oversight, she clearly had 
enough influence on the process to pressure her U.N. colleagues to 
accept a no-bid contract. Why would she then be unable to use this same 
influence to press for controls, transparency, and accountability in 
order to protect her Peacekeeping Operations from being undermined by 
cost overruns, waste, and illicit behavior?
  If the assessment from the U.N. official in the Management Department 
is correct, Ms. Lute failed the preparedness test when it came to rapid 
deployment of resources and personnel to respond to new crises. 
Preparedness is what she was responsible for at U.N. Peacekeeping, and 
it will be what she is responsible for at DHS.
  Another indication that Ms. Lute had more responsibility for 
Peacekeeping procurement than what she admitted to at her hearing was 
that she publicly defended the Peacekeeping procurement fraud when it 
was made public in the media. In 2007, the Washington Post published 
its report on the Peacekeeping procurement fraud after the U.N. audits 
were leaked. Ms. Lute chose to respond on behalf of U.N. Peacekeeping. 
In her op-ed, she makes excuses for the fraud, claims there is no 
pattern of abuse in peacekeeping procurement, and misrepresented the 
Washington Post article in order to discredit it. She claims the 
article was misleading when it said that peacekeeping ``suffered losses 
in the hundreds of millions.'' In reality, the article quoted directly 
from the U.N. audits saying correctly that U.N. auditors found multiple 
instances of fraud that tainted $610 million worth of contracts.\10\
  If Ms. Lute was truly not responsible for the massive amount of 
procurement fraud, it is odd that she would then choose to represent 
peacekeeping procurement and rebut this article. Even if she had no 
responsibility for the mismanagement and fraud, it would have been much 
more productive if Ms. Lute chose instead to use this opportunity in 
her op-ed to make the case for reforming Peacekeeping operations and 
procurement, offer suggestions for cutting waste, and laying out a 
better preparedness plan and logistics concept. Unfortunately, we have 
no record of Ms. Lute speaking out about the problems that were 
undermining U.N. Peacekeeping or offering reform ideas whether at a 
press conference or in a report to the U.N. Security Council.
  The Procurement Task Force released a report in July of 2007 
regarding its investigation of ground fuel procurement in the U.N. 
peacekeeping mission to Haiti, MINUSTAH.\11\ The conclusion of the 
report indicated the ground fuel procurement process was not conducted 
in a fair and transparent manner resulting in bid rigging and the 
awarding of the contract to a company initially ranked as ``non-
compliant.'' U.N. staff from both Procurement and Peacekeeping 
Departments was responsible. This report made several findings that 
reflect on Ms. Lute's performance as manager of resources and field 
deployment.
  For example, it reports that Ms. Lute failed to staff MINUSTAH with 
experienced fuel staff that could evaluate the technical and commercial 
aspects of the fuel contracting.\12\
  It also illustrates that Ms. Lute failed to act on the continual 
supply chain inconsistencies. The report shows that Peacekeeping staff 
reported problems including the discrepancy between how much fuel was 
purchased and what was actually delivered, the contractor's use of 
substandard fuel tankers, and other problems. Even after the problem 
had been flagged, the contract was never pulled and reassigned.\13\
  Making the U.N.'s risk exposure even worse, under Ms. Lute's watch, 
MINUSTAH received its fuel supply with an expired contract. The initial 
fuel contract expired, and while the long-term contract was being 
prepared, the poor-performing contractor continued to supply fuel to 
the mission without a written contract.\14\
  Ms. Lute failed to step in when poor-performing contractor was given 
long-term contract despite repeated reports of inconsistent fuel supply 
and poor performance measurements.\15\ Bid rigging by U.N. Peacekeeping 
and Procurement staff was again to blame.\16\
  Since this took place towards the end of her time managing U.N. 
Peacekeeping, it is telling that, even after five years managing 
Peacekeeping Operations, Ms. Lute failed to have the proper controls in 
place that would prevent this from occurring or from being overlooked 
so many times.
  Another U.N. audit report written towards the end of Ms. Lute's time 
managing Peacekeeping revealed another mission she deployed without 
proper controls in place. The Procurement Task Force released an audit 
in May of 2007 regarding its assessment of procurement fraud indicators 
in the mission to Liberia, UMIL.\17\ The audit was designed to test 
whether UNMIL had the proper controls in place to protect against fraud 
and corruption.
  Regarding UNMIL's requisitioning office, which is under Ms. Lute's 
management, the audit found that Ms. Lute failed to initiate good 
business practice and internal control principles by not limiting the 
number of persons that can raise requisitions.\18\ It also found that 
Ms. Lute failed to staff the requisition office with qualified staff 
that could ensure specifications on the requisition are accurate. This 
could lead to inefficient procurement, wasteful purchases, and loss of 
funds.\19\
  Ms. Lute's record responding to Peacekeeper rape and sexual 
exploitation of women and children is also troubling.
  For years, U.N. watchdogs, human rights groups, and now U.N. auditors 
have been documenting hundreds of allegations and confirmed instances 
of sexual crimes against women and small children under U.N. 
peacekeeping care and protection. The perpetrators include both 
military and civilian Peacekeeping personnel. Allegations of misconduct 
have been made in every major Peacekeeping operation including the 
Democratic Republic of Congo, Bosnia, Burundi, Cambodia, Guinea, Haiti, 
Ivory Coast, Kosovo, Liberia, Sierra Leone, and the Sudan.\20\
  Ms. Lute was responsible for the U.N. response to and prevention of 
the rape and sexual exploitation. Despite claiming a ``zero tolerance'' 
policy and having systems in place to help prevent this abuse, Ms. 
Lute's record suggests otherwise with abuse continuing to plague 
peacekeeping operations and no known prosecution and imprisonment of a 
single perpetrator.
  In 2004, reports first began emerging of the rampant sexual 
exploitation of children at the Republic of Congo, DRC, peacekeeping 
mission. According to press reports, in June 2004, U.N. Peacekeeping 
managers were informed by the head of the DRC Mission that there were 
initially 50 allegations of sexual abuse, 42 involving minors, but 
total allegations rose to 72 in a followup report.\21\ The report 
detailed acts such as the rape of a minor in a U.N. armored personnel 
carrier and a prostitution network of minors at the U.N. airport.

[[Page 9885]]

  The media reports indicate that the investigation done by Ms. Lute 
and the other managers of U.N. Peacekeeping Operations was fatally 
flawed. There was no witness protection offered to the victims which 
led to witnesses being bribed or threatened to change their testimony. 
Investigators were reportedly ordered to only investigate claims in one 
town while ignoring the numerous claims made throughout the DRC.
  It is also reported that a high-ranking Peacekeeping official for the 
U.N. Mission to the DRC was sexually exploiting minors as young as 13, 
and eventually 150 cases were brought against Peacekeeping soldiers and 
civilians ranging from abduction and rape of minors to the finding of 
more than 250 images of child pornography involving Congolese children 
on the laptop of a U.N. official.
  The OIOS documented in January, 2005 at least 7 cases of underage 
sexual abuse committed by U.N. peacekeepers, and all but one of them 
were fully substantiated.
  There were also press reports of abuses in the Sudan during this same 
time period. According to The Daily Telegraph, in 2005, U.N. officials 
knew of the sexual abuse of children as young as 12 that began in 2005 
soon after the U.N. Peacekeeping mission in Southern Sudan, UNMIS, went 
to work to rebuild the region.\22\ A leaked internal report compiled by 
the U.N. children's agency, UNICEF, in July 2005 referred to the sexual 
exploitation perpetrated by U.N. peacekeepers, military policy, and 
civilian staff. According to the paper, this report was substantiated 
by a preliminary report from a leading U.N. affiliated NGO that was 
unwilling to be named for political reasons.
  Allegedly hundreds of children have been abused, and the Telegraph 
has independently documented at least 20 victims claiming U.N. 
peacekeepers and civilian staff regularly picked up young children in 
U.N. vehicles and raped them.
  As Under Secretary General for Field Support, Ms. Lute was 
responsible for responding to this issue and implementing policies to 
prevent this abuse and bring the perpetrators to justice. Sadly, even 
after implementing weak reforms--such as what amounts to sexual 
harassment training for peacekeepers--the abuse continued and there are 
no known prosecutions or imprisonments for the perpetrators.
  In 2006, U.N. investigators at the OIOS substantiated reports that 
U.N. peacekeepers in Liberia had sexually abused an under-age girl and 
U.N. peacekeepers in the Sudan had sexually abused four women.\23\ In 
2008, the NGO Save the Children reported that peacekeepers were 
sexually abusing very young children in war zones and disaster areas in 
the Ivory Coast, southern Sudan, and Haiti-- and going largely 
unpunished.\24\ Save the Children reports, ``Children as young as six 
are trading sex with aid workers and peacekeepers in exchange for food, 
money, soap and, in very few cases, luxury items such as mobile 
phones.''
  According to Marianne Mollman of Human Rights Watch, the current 
status of the U.N. response to peacekeeping abuses continues to be 
poor.\25\ Mollman describes investigations of the abuse carried out by 
Ms. Lute as follows: lack of speed of investigations, lack of 
transparency and follow through of investigations, and lack of breadth 
of investigations.
  There are other instances of illicit behavior going largely 
unpunished during Ms. Lute's tenure at Peacekeeping. In 2008, Human 
Rights Watch issued a letter regarding several cases where Peacekeepers 
were involved in other illicit activities such as gold-smuggling and 
weapons trading. In these cases, like the sexual abuse case, Human 
Rights Watch reports that ``the slow process in carrying out this 
investigation and the continued lack of action raises important 
questions on how the U.N. investigates itself.'' \26\
  When I questioned Ms. Lute about the number of victims she provided 
assistance to, the budget of her victims' assistance program, the 
number of perpetrators she successfully had prosecuted, and other basic 
information, she responded saying she knows of no reports that track 
this information. This is a disturbing answer from someone claiming to 
effectively deploy victims' assistance into the field while reports on 
the ground claim there are many victims that have been waiting for over 
4 years but still have not received assistance from Ms. Lute. This 
certainly does not sound like a policy of ``zero tolerance.''
  In her response, Ms. Lute also points out that she coordinated 
meetings and discussions and conferences at the U.N. regarding 
Peacekeeping abuse and victims' assistance. But she cannot produce any 
evidence or information illustrating she carried out the victims' 
assistance programs or whether any such programs were effective.
  In my questions for the Record, in order to ascertain whether or not 
Ms. Lute has the qualifications to manage DHS, I asked Ms. Lute whether 
she had experience managing DHS issues and activities such as border 
security, immigration, port security, counterterrorism, or other DHS-
specific portfolios. In her written response, Ms. Lute claims she had 
``responsibilities for border security and management where stopping 
the flow of illegal arms and narcotics is a central part of the 
Mission's mandate.''
  It is important to point out that we have no evidence or data that 
suggests Ms. Lute has been successful in this endeavor. Using the 
Peacekeeping Mission to Lebanon as an example, this one mission alone 
illustrates Ms. Lute's poor performance at stopping the flow of illegal 
arms as Hezbollah has, on multiple occasions, successfully armed and 
rearmed on the Israeli border. There are also multiple reports of 
illegal arms smuggling involving Peacekeepers in Africa supplying arms 
to local militias.\27\
  Ms. Lute also pointed out that she operated a port in the Congo along 
a river. When I questioned her at the hearing regarding her 
responsibility for the abuse that took place in the Congo on her watch, 
she claimed that she had little ``on the ground'' management 
responsibilities. Her story changes when asked to provide her 
experience and qualifications to manage DHS.
  In her response to my prehearing questions, Ms. Lute indicated that 
she utilized several performance indicators to determine whether or not 
her programs were effective. I then asked Ms. Lute whether there is any 
record of these performance measures or any reports that audit her 
operations based on these indicators. Ms. Lute responded that she 
``cannot recall specifically which report or which measure'' were 
tracking her performance. In other words, it appears Ms. Lute has not 
received specific performance reports and lacks a working knowledge of 
how she performed according to those standards. I believe it is 
impossible to manage what you do not measure.
  Unfortunately for Ms. Lute, the entire U.N. system, including 
Peacekeeping Operations, lacks even the most basic transparency or 
accountability. Without transparency, we cannot discover whether or not 
there is evidence that Ms. Lute, during her tenure at U.N. 
Peacekeeping, was able to turn her operations around, institute 
controls, make policy reforms, and whether these efforts were 
successful.
  Every U.N. report that we were able to receive after they were first 
leaked indicates that operations under Ms. Lute's management were 
undermined by fraud, waste, corruption, and mismanagement. We have no 
positive record of Ms. Lute's performance measurements. Several former 
U.N. officials have written letters of endorsement for Ms. Lute, but 
the endorsements were based on Ms. Lute's verbal commitment to address 
the waste and fraud, and none of these officials actually investigated 
what Ms. Lute did in response or whether her response was effective.
  I believe that Ms. Lute is unqualified and inexperienced to manage 
the Department of Homeland Security. Given her record that we are able 
to document, I cannot in good conscience support her nomination.


                                ENDNOTES

       \1\ Report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services 
     Part two: peacekeeping operations,'' U.N. Office of Internal 
     Oversight

[[Page 9886]]

     Services, February 23, 2007 and ``Report of the Office of 
     Internal Oversight Services on the activities of the 
     Procurement Task Force for the 18-month period ended 30 June 
     2007,'' U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services, October 
     5, 2007--http://tinyurl.com/9ext17; ``Report on the 
     activities of the Office of Internal Oversight Services for 
     the period from 1 January to 31 December 2007,'' U.N. Office 
     of Internal Oversight Services, February 25, 2008.
       \2\ OIOS, October 5, 2007, pg 16.
       \3\ OIOS, February 23, 2007, pg 2.
       \4\ OIOS, February 25, 2008., pg 11.
       \5\ OIOS, October 5, 2007, pg 2.
       \6\ OIOS, February 23, 2007, pg. 8.
       \7\ OIOS, February 23, 2007, pg. 17.
       \8\ Pg 9-10, ``Report on the activities of the Office of 
     Internal Oversight Services for the period from 1 January to 
     31 December 2007,'' U.N. Office of Internal Oversight 
     Services, February 25, 2008.
       \9\ Lee, Matthew Russel, ``UN's Jane Holl Lute Admits No-
     Bid Lockheed Martin Deal Caused `Confusion,' Says No Conflict 
     of Interest In Iraq and Afghan Overlap with Husband's Role,'' 
     Intercity Press, February 11, 2008--http://tinyurl.com/cvycq6
       \10\ Lynch, Colum, ``U.N. Finds Fraud, Mismanagement in 
     Peacekeeping,'' Washington Post, December 18, 2007; Lute, 
     Jane Holl, ``Overstating Corruption at the U.N.,'' Washington 
     Post, December 26, 2007.
       \11\ ``Report on the Ground Fuel Procurements at 
     MINUSTAH,'' Report no. PTF-R010/07, OIOS, July 16, 2007.
       \12\ OIOS, July 16, 2007, pg. 10.
       \13\ OIOS, July 16, 2007, pg. 22.
       \14\ OIOS, July 16, 2007, pg. 24.
       \15\ OIOS, July 16, 2007, pg. 33.
       \16\ OIOS, July 16, 2007, pg. 44.
       \17\ ``Audit Report: Procurement fraud indicators in 
     UNMIL,'' Assignment no. AP2006/626/02, OIOS, May 21, 2007.
       \18\ OIOS, May 21, 2007, pg. 2.
       \19\ OIOS, May 21, 2007, pg. 3.
       \20\ Schaeffer, Brett, ``United Nations Peacekeeping: The 
     U.S. Must Press for Reform,'' Heritage Foundation, September 
     18, 2008--http://tinyurl.com/brazs6
       \21\ Holt, Kate and Sarah Hughes, ``UN: When peacemakers 
     become predators,'' The Independent, January 11, 2005
       \22\ Holt, Kate and Sarah Hughes, ``U.N. Staff Accused of 
     Raping Children in Sudan,'' The Daily Telegraph, January 4, 
     2007--http://tinyurl.com/ympgtn
       \23\ ``Report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services 
     Part two: peacekeeping operations,'' Office of Internal 
     Oversight, February 23, 2007.
       \24\ Corinna Csaky, ``No One to Turn To: The Under-
     Reporting of Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse by Aid 
     Workers and Peacekeepers,'' Save the Children, 2008--http://
tinyurl.com/cun6zb
       \25\ Phone interview with and email from Marianne Mollman, 
     Human Rights Watch, February 2, 2008.
       \26\ Roth, Kenneth and Steve Crawshaw, ``UN: Hold 
     Peacekeepers Accountable for Congo Smuggling: Letter to Chief 
     of UN Peacekeeping Urges Follow-Through,'' Human Rights 
     Watch, July 22, 2007--http://tinyurl.com/dj36xb
       \27\ Roth, Kenneth and Steve Crawshaw, ``UN: Hold 
     Peacekeepers Accountable for Congo Smuggling: Letter to Chief 
     of UN Peacekeeping Urges Follow-Through,'' Human Rights 
     Watch, July 22, 2007--http://tinyurl.com/dj36xb; 
     ``Peacekeepers sell arms to Somalis,'' BBC News, May 23, 
     2008--http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7417435.stm.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Shall the Senate advise and 
consent to the nomination of Jane Holl Lute to be Deputy Secretary of 
Homeland Security?
  The nomination was confirmed.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the President 
be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate resume 
legislative session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the Senate was poised today to confirm 
three more superbly qualified nominees to fill top leadership positions 
at the Department of Justice before adjourning for the 2-week April 
recess. Instead, the Republican minority has returned to the tactics of 
anonymous and unaccountable holds they employed when they were in the 
majority to block scores of President Clinton's nominees.
  Attorney General Holder needs his leadership team in place to rebuild 
and restore the Department. Tony West, President Obama's nominee to 
lead the Civil Division, Lanny Breuer, nominated to head the Criminal 
Division, and Christine Varney, nominated to head the Antitrust 
Division, have all chosen to leave lucrative private practices to 
return to Government service.
  None of these are controversial nominees. They all received numerous 
letters of strong support, and endorsements from both Republican and 
Democratic former public officials. They were all reported out of the 
Judiciary Committee last week by unanimous consent. We should be 
confirming them today, not holding them hostage to the tired partisan 
playbook of Senate Republicans.
  Tony West knows the Department of Justice well. He served in the 
Department as a Special Assistant to Deputy Attorneys General Philip 
Heymann and Jamie Gorelick. He then worked as a Federal prosecutor in 
the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of California. His 
commitment to public service continued when he became a Special 
Assistant Attorney General in the California Department of Justice. He 
has also worked in private practice. Mr. West is a graduate of Harvard 
University and Stanford University Law School, where he served as 
president of the Stanford Law Review.
  His nomination has earned support from both sides of the aisle. The 
former chairman of the California Republican Party, George Sundheim, 
sent a letter to the committee stating that Mr. West is admired by 
``both sides of the aisle'' for his ``integrity, honesty and decency,'' 
and that there is no one ``more qualified to assume a position of 
leadership in the Department of Justice.'' The Federal prosecutors who 
worked across the table from Mr. West during the high-profile 
prosecution of John Walker Lindh witnessed Mr. West's ``extraordinary 
professionalism,'' and ``smart advocacy . . . executed with the highest 
degree of integrity.'' We should be confirming this outstanding leader 
for the Civil Division today.
  President Obama has said that Lanny Breuer has the ``depth of 
experience and integrity'' to fulfill the highest standards of the 
American people and the Department of Justice. I agree. Mr. Breuer 
began his legal career as an assistant district attorney in the 
Manhattan District Attorney's Office. He told us during his hearing 
that his commitment to ensuring justice for all Americans stemmed from 
his days working on the front lines of the fight against crime as a 
Manhattan prosecutor. His call to public service continued while 
serving in the White House Counsel's Office as a special counsel to 
President Clinton. Mr. Breuer has also worked in private practice for 
the prestigious Washington, DC, law firm of Covington & Burling. He is 
a graduate of Columbia Law School and Columbia University.
  Michael Chertoff, who led the Criminal Division at the Department of 
Justice during the Bush administration, endorsed Mr. Breuer's 
nomination, saying he has ``exceptionally broad legal experience as a 
former prosecutor and defense attorney'' and has ``outstanding 
judgment, a keen sense of fairness, high integrity and an even 
temperament.'' Brad Berenson, a veteran of the Bush administration's 
White House counsel's office, writes that Mr. Breuer is ``everything 
one could hope for in a leader of the Criminal Division.''
  Mr. Breuer's former colleagues from the Manhattan District Attorney's 
Office have said that as a criminal prosecutor, he ``distinguished 
himself as a tenacious but scrupulously fair trial lawyer, driven by 
the unwavering goal of achieving justice.'' Former Deputy Attorney 
General Larry D. Thompson and former Congressman and DEA Administrator 
Asa Hutchinson have also written to the committee in support of Mr. 
Breuer's nomination. I agree with all their comments and wish the 
Republican minority was not stalling confirmation of Mr. Breuer's 
nomination.
  Christine Varney was confirmed to be a U.S. Federal Trade 
Commissioner in 1994, after being nominated by President Clinton. As a 
Federal Trade Commissioner, Ms. Varney gained valuable experience in 
antitrust enforcement and in reducing anticompetitive measures that 
harm American consumers. Her Government service work includes a high 
level position in President Clinton's White House, where she served as 
an assistant to the President and secretary to the Cabinet. She has 
worked in private practice for the prestigious Washington, DC, law firm 
of Hogan & Hartson. She also graduated from my alma mater, the 
Georgetown University Law Center.

[[Page 9887]]

  Her nomination is supported by individuals who served in the 
Antitrust Division during both Democratic and Republican 
administrations. John Shenefield and James Rill, both former heads of 
the Antitrust Division, say that she is ``extraordinarily well 
qualified to lead the Antitrust Division.'' Twenty former chairs of the 
American Bar Association Section of Antitrust Law have described Ms. 
Varney as a ``highly accomplished, capable nominee who will serve 
consumers and this country with distinction'' and who will have 
``immediate credibility'' in her new position.
  I agree. At a time when our economy is suffering, there is a 
temptation to act anticompetitively. We need to make sure that we have 
a strong and effective advocate for competition and the interests of 
consumers in place. Now is not the time for delay.
  Republican Senators delayed for weeks the confirmation of Harvard Law 
School Dean Elena Kagan to be the Solicitor General of the United 
States, before demanding an extended debate on her nomination. They 
have yet to consent to a time agreement on the nomination of Dawn 
Johnsen to lead the critical Office of Legal Counsel. And they are now 
holding up three nominations today, including the nomination of 
Christine Varney to head the Antitrust Division. I am concerned that 
Republican delay tactics are creating a double standard for these 
highly qualified women. Republicans did not apply the same standards or 
make the same demands for extensive followup information and meetings 
when supporting President Bush's nominations to the same posts.
  Indeed, The New York Times and Roll Call yesterday each featured 
reports suggesting that Senate Republicans intend to, and are planning 
to, filibuster the nomination of Dawn Johnsen to serve as the Assistant 
Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice 
Department. I cannot remember a time when Democratic Senators 
filibustered a Justice Department nomination. Speech after speech by 
Republican Senators just a few short years ago about how it would be 
unconstitutional to filibuster Presidential nominees appear now to be 
just speeches that served a partisan political purpose at the time.
  During last week's formal installation of the Attorney General, 
President Obama reminded Americans and the world that what makes our 
country unique is that ``we are bound together not by a shared 
bloodline or allegiance to any one leader or faith or creed, but by an 
adherence to a set of ideals.'' The men and women at the Department of 
Justice have a special duty to uphold the rule of law because ``laws 
are only as effective, only as compassionate, [and] only as fair as 
those who enforce them.''
  All of the nominees we should be considering and confirming today fit 
the mold described by President Obama and the best traditions of the 
Department of Justice. I urge Republican Senators to reconsider their 
partisan obstructionist approach and return from recess ready to end 
the delays and confirm these nominees.

                          ____________________