Our recent debates have been heated, but curiously, talk of judge merricks actual credentials or qualifications has hardly featured judge merricks actual credentials or qualifications have early ttsured judge barre actual credentials have rarely featured. They have tried to claim the process itself is not legitimate. These claims are supposed to lay groundwork for radical institution wrecking changes down the road. But of course, they are not true. We live in a constitutional republic. The legitimacy of an outcome does not depend on the feelings it provokes in politicians. Let me say that again. The legitimacy of an outcome does not depend on the feelings it provokes in politicians. Legitimacy comes from precedents, rules, and ultimately, the constitution, so lets restate a few facts for posterity. There is no inconsistency between the republican senators decision in 2016 and our decision to confirm judge barrett this year. Heres what i said in my very first floor speech following the death of justice scalia. The senate has not filled a vacancy arising in an Election Year when there was ,ivided government since 1888 almost 130 years ago. Not setting some new precedent, just stating a fact. 15 times in American History during a president ial Election Year, new Supreme Court vacancies have arisen, and president s have made nominations. Seven of the 15 times, voters had elected an opposite party senate to check and balance the sitting president. Not surprisingly in those situations, only two of the seven were confirmed and the since 1888. The other eight times, the same party controlled the senate and the white house. Seven of those eight were confirmed, all but one. Unraveledception in a scandal. Would follow precedent in 2016 and we are following precedent this week. Number two. Chairmanen claimed graham broke the rules by pointing out judge barretts nomination. Not so. As parliament confirmed on thursday, standing rule 26 and Senate President are crystal clear. Isa majority of a committee physically present, and votes in favor of a nomination, reporting it to the floor is a valid action irrespective of what Committee Rules may say. And chairman graham didnt even violate the rules of his own committee. Past chairman of both parties have done exactly what chairman graham did on thursday morning. Example,for one chairman leahy and the committees democratic majority voted multiple federal judges to the floor without two members of the minority present. Just a few years ago. Nothing remotely unprecedented took place. Not in committee, not on the floor. Three, timing. Some colleagues kept repeating the absurd claims this is the most rushed confirmation process in history. Well, mr. President , that is flatout false. From the announcement of the nomination to the hurry hearings, eight Supreme Court nominations in the last 60 years moved more quickly than this one. Years movede last 60 more quickly than this one. Then, from the end of the hearing to the committee vote, half of all confirmations since 1916 actually moved faster than this one. Justice stephens was confirmed in 19 days from start to finish. Gestures sandra day oconnor, in about four weeks Justice Sandra day oconnor, in about four weeks. In the past, one week. Some in one day. There is no argument judge barretts nomination has moved at some breakneck pace. Facts are facts. Number four. Trary to what spin claimed what has been claimed, the senate has confirmed Supreme Court nominees later in president ial Election Years than this one. Multiple justices were confirmed after elections had already happened. Weve had multiple Supreme Court justices confirmed in december of Election Years. Senates have even confirmed nominees for lameduck president s who had just lost. So and other nonissue. All of these false claims embarrass those who repeat them, but the most important point is this. Legitimacy does not flow from the whims of politicians. Not depend ons which Political Party makes a decision. Legitimacy comes from traditions, rules, and the constitution. Our democratic colleagues have went much of session demanding the president acknowledged the election will be legitimate, even if he loses. Here in the senate, here . With this confirmation process . Democrats are flunking their own test. So let me say that again. Democrats want President Trump to keep repeating the election will be legitimate regardless of if he wins. In the senate, the same people are saying our vote monday will only be valid if they like the outcome. Our republic cannot abide any political faction making sloppy senate floor. We are not happy. Of course they are not happy. That doesnt make anything about this illegitimate. That kind of recklessness, mr. President , leads down a road none of us should want to travel. So thats why i keep correcting the record. Even though it might seem silly. If republicans have the votes, why not exhort my ignore my colleagues misstatements and move on . Ive chosen not to do that. It remains our duty to separate right and wrong, fact from fiction for the good of the senate and for our country. Mr. Schumer mr. President. The presiding officer the democrat leader. Mr. Schumer i
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.