[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 14]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 20063-20064]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          INTRODUCTION OF THE BANKRUPTCY JUDGESHIP ACT OF 2015

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, December 10, 2015

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, the ``Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 2015,'' 
authorizes 6 additional permanent bankruptcy judgeships and converts 16 
temporary bankruptcy judgeships to permanent status, based on 
recommendation of the Judicial Conference of the United States. With 
respect to the 6 additional permanent bankruptcy judgeships, they are 
authorized pursuant to section 3 of the bill as follows: 2 for the 
District of Delaware; 2 for the Eastern District of Michigan; and 2 for 
the Middle District of Florida. With respect to the 16 conversions, 
they are authorized pursuant to section 2 of the bill for the following 
districts:
  5 for the District of Delaware;
  2 for the Southern District of Florida;
  3 for the District of Maryland;
  1 for the Eastern District of Michigan;
  1 for the District of Nevada;
  1 for the Eastern District of North Carolina;
  2 for the District of Puerto Rico;
  1 for the Western District of Tennessee; and
  1 for the Eastern District of Virginia.
  This legislation responds to a serious need. Since the last time 
additional bankruptcy judgeships were authorized, which was 10 years 
ago, the 6 districts that would be authorized additional judicial 
resources by this bill have experienced a 55 percent increase in 
weighted filings, according to the Judicial Conference.
  All 16 of the temporary bankruptcy judgeships that the bill converts 
to permanent status are set to lapse as of May 25, 2017. As the 
Conference observes, ``These bankruptcy courts would face a serious 
and, in many cases, debilitating workload crisis if their temporary 
judgeships were to expire.''
  The need for these additional judicial resources is based on a 
comprehensive analysis performed by the Judicial Conference based on a 
formal survey of all judicial circuits conducted pursuant to section 
152(b)(2) of title 28 of the United States Code. Criteria considered 
include the workload of each court, case filing

[[Page 20064]]

statistics, and geographic factors, among other matters.

                          ____________________