Transcripts For CSPAN2 U.S. Senate 11012017 20171101

Vote vote vote the presiding officer have all senators voted . Any senator wishing to change their vote . On this nomination the yeas are 60. The nays are 38. The nomination is confirmed. Under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table. The president will be immediately notified of the senates action. The clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. The clerk cloture motion. We the undersigned senators in accordance provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of allison eid. The presiding officer the question is is it the sense of the debate than the nomination of allison eid of colorado to be United States circuit judge for the tenth circuit shall be brought to a close. The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. The clerk will call the roll. Vote vote vote the presiding officer are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote . If not, the yeas are 56, the nays are 42. The motion is agreed to. The clerk will report the nomination. The clerk the judiciary, allison h. Eid of colorado to be United States circuit judge for the tenth circuit. A senator mr. President , i have eight requests for committees to meet during today session of the senate. They have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. The presiding officer duly noted. A senator thank you, mr. President. I rise today to add my voice, my strong support, to the confirmation of Colorado Supreme Court Justice Allison hed as the next judge for the tenth circuit. There is no doubt that justice eid is sue punishly qualified for that position. Mr. Gardner for the past decade she has served colorado as a justice on the Supreme Court and in 2008 she was overwhelmingly retained by the people of colorado. We have a system where every decade the voters of colorado vote to retain or dismiss a judge, and every time that has come before the people of colorado, she has been overwhelmingly retained by the people of colorado. Prior to her appointment, justice eid represented the state of colorado before the state and federal courts as our state solicitor general. She served as a tenured member of the faculty at the university of colorados law school, where she taught courses in constitutional law, legislation, torts, and has published scholarly articles on topics like constitutional federalism and tort law, in addition to being a clerk on the Supreme Court. She also practiced commercial and appellate litigation at the denver offers of the National Law Firm arnold porter. She began as a clerk to a judge on the United States court for the fifth circuit. It took her to the u. S. Supreme court under clarence thomas. She was a special assistant and speechwriter for United States secretary of Education Bill bennett. She received her law school from the university of law schoo chiw school. She received her degree in american studies from Stanford University graduating with distinction as a member of phi beta cap d. A. Pa. What phi beta kappa. What she does, she does it at the highest level, with the best results. She has Specialized Knowledge in federalism, water law and indian law, among other important areas of the law. Indeed, the National Native American Bar Association has even noted that she has, quote, significantly more experience with indian law cases than any other recent Circuit Court nominee, and weve had some pretty doggone circuit nominees in the past, including justice gorsuch, whose seat she will be filling. These are concepts that are critical in my home state of colorado federalism, water law, native american issues. Her expertise will prove to be value to both the court as well as the nations the people of this country as well. But as impressive as her credentials are, it is her meanor an and her it is her demeanor i justice eid has been called a mainstream commonsense westerner. As her former law clerks have noted, she is also fiercely independent. At the same time, she seeks out different viewpoints and thes to understand all sides of the issue that she addresses. Thati cansay from my experiencw school, i can say that while justice eid has her perspectives on the law, she cares very deeply on robust debate and hearing the views of others. I know from my classmates who had justice eid as their professor, those classmates of mine who didnt always agree with her perspectives, that justice eid wastope their debate, hearing their views. She engaged them. And she was never biased against differing perspectives but always applying the law as the law required, not as opinions suited. I also know that fierceliful jurists her former clerks spoke so highly about. She will follow the law regardless of personal whim or opinion. Whether discerning the proper role of the courts or evaluating the relationships between the federal government and the states, justice eid will side with what the law says. And she will do it in that commonsense western way that clearly and articulately tells the American People what the law is. Im privileged to know justice eid. Ive known her for a number of years now from my state as a student at the university of Colorado School of law to her work at the state of colorado. At the time that i served in the state legislature, she is an incredible human being a with delightful demeanor that will suit the court well. Id like to ask unanimous consent to submit several letters for the record, one from the National Native American Bar Association in support of justice eids nomination. I also ask consent to insert into the record a letter to chairman grassley and Ranking Member feinstein from a former law clerks of justice eid, as well as a letter from various supporters in colorado and one letter from the southern ute indian tribe. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Gardner thank you, mr. President. I wanted to spend some time talking about a letter dated july 2017. This letter was sent to myself and my colleague, senator bennet from colorado. This letter was entitled support for the confirmation of Justice Allison eid to the tenth Circuit Court of appeals and its already now in the record. I want to highlight some of the people who have signed this letter. Because when it comes to the courts and nominations, i think it is very important that we listen to the voices of those people who are closest to their court. They may be presiding over. Its also important that those who are close toast a practicing lawyer provide their opinions of a lawyer whos been nominated for the bench who is not already on the bench. In the case of justice eids supporters, there is an incredible list of people from across the political spectrum, both sides of the aisle, supporting justice eid. Let me just talk about a few of justice eids supporters because youll hear a lost debate about groups who support or oppose justice eid but the people who know her the best, the people who have practiced before her court, the people who have worked with her over the many years of Public Service that she has provided, dont just fall on the republican side of the aisle or dont just fall on the democrat side of the aisle, but its across the political spectrum, the support that she has gathered. Michael bender, former Colorado Supreme Court justice; justice reback can a love corliss, who served on the state Supreme Court and is one of the most highly regarded justices across the country; mary malarkey, no longer on the Supreme Court but she served as the chief justice of the Colorado Supreme Court; she was appointed by a democrat governor, somebody who believes justice eid would be an incredible addition to the court; kneel catchall, former department of justice Civil Servant for the obama administration, u. S. Solicitor general in fact, and if you look at the other supporters she has, most have run as a democrat candidate, supports the nomination and confirmation of Justice Allison eid. As you can see, once again the tenth circuit has an incredible nominee before it that i hope this body will soon confirm. I would urge my colleagues to move quickly during this cloture time so that we can actually approve somebody who i know will do an outstanding job for this court. I think urge their support and i hope that we will do our duty under our constitution to select those people who will be guardians of the constitution and do it in a way we will be proud of. Thats why i support the confirmation of allison eidd eid. Thank you, i yield the floor back my time. Mr. Whitehouse mr. President , i come to the floor for the 184th time to ask us to at last wake up to our duty as a congress to enact some prudent policies to address the looming effects of Climate Change. The presiding officer is well aware of what alaska faces from Ocean Acidification and ocean melting and Sea Level Rise and all of that. For the generations who will look back at this, i have tried in these speeches to chronicle the political tricks and bullying that have put congress the congress of the United States in tow to a massively conflicted special interest, such as we are incapacitated on this vital subject. The shamelessness of the fossil fuel industry and the spinelessness of congress in standing up to it will provide a long lesson in modernday corruption and political failure. The Trump Administration has been particularly loathsome, threatening the emissions standarded for cars and tax reduction, disbanding science advisory committees, liftin life moratorium on coal leasing and opening sanctuaries to energy confirms the Environmental Protection agency is working to eliminate rules on the leaking and flaring of methane and has rescinded requirements for reporting methane emissions. The president has announced his intention to withdraw the u. S. From the paris climate agreement. One particular target of this corrupted administration is the Clean Power Plan, the 2015 e. P. A. Rule to reduce Carbon Dioxide emissions from American Power plants, a rule which many utilities and states supported, but its the industrys bottom dwellers who have the presiden president s ear, and they want to undo even this flexible framework from meeting emissions reduction targets. When e. P. A. Balanced the costs and benefits of the Clean Power Plan originally, it offset things like between 14 billion and 34 billion in Health Benefits in the form of preventive illnesses and deaths against the costs of industry compliance. The net benefits of the Clean Power Plan came out to between 26 billion and 45 billion every year. So with its official proposal to rescind the Clean Power Plan, e. P. A. Administrator and fossil fuel operative scott pruitt had to cook the books to wipe out this public benefit. Heres how he did it. There were two tricks. One derives from the fact that harms, injuries and losses caused by Carbon Pollution can take place many years after the pollution is emitted. Now, in financial matters, future costs and benefits are balanced against present costs and benefits using whats called a discount rate. Its more valuable to receive a Million Dollars now than a Million Dollars 20 years if now is the theory. But even the george w. Bush administration recognized for Health Care Rule making that and i quote them here special ethical considerations arise when comparing benefits and costs across generations. And they urge care about using a discount rate when a rule is expected to harm future generations. In 2015, the United States settled on a 3 discount rate to estimate the outyear costs of Carbon Pollution to society. Well, scott pruitt jacked that up to a 7 discount rate. So outyear harms, injuries, and losses would count for less. Now, mind you, our children and grandchildren will still suffer the exact same costs at 3 or at 7 . Its just that present day polluters, Scott Pruitts masters, get a way big discount. Pruitts second trick is only to count the Carbon Pollution harm within our borders. Well, you might say thats okay. Were americans after all. But its worth taking a look at what this rule does if all countries were to use it. Because theres a trick hidden in the middle of it. The fact is that we are harmed by other countries carbon emissions. And they in turn are harmed by our carbon emissions. And on the flip side, we harm other countries with our emissions and they harm us with theirs. There is a total amount of global emissions, and there is a total amount of global harm. If you call the total global emissions x and the total global harm y, what happens . When every country follows the pruitt method of only pricing local emissions and local harms . For purposes of illustration, lets say that there are three countries in the world. And each emits onethird of the total global Carbon Pollution and suffers onethird of the global harm from the collective global emissions. If each country only counts its own emissions and the harms only to its own country, guess what happens . All that crossborder harm never gets counted. It never gets counted. It disappears off the balance sheet. It vanishes into this trick of calculation. If you are the tool of the fossil fuel industry, how rewarding it must be to implement a trick that just vanishes so much of the fossil fuel industrys harm to the world. In this hypothetical, how much harm simply vanishes . Twothirds of it. Two thirmds of the harm twothirds of the harm simply vanishes, never to be accounted for. Not in the real world. Nothing has changed in the real world. In this threecountry hypothetical, total emissions is still x. Total harm is still y. None of that has changed. The pruitt trick of accounting just wiped twothirds of the harm off the books. Happy day for polluters and happy, happy day for the polluters tool for there will no doubt be rewards for implementing this trick. Those fossil fuel industry bottom dwellers no doubt think that this is pretty cute, this is pretty clever stuff indeed. High fives in the corporate boardrooms that they have a tool in office who will pull such a trick of magical vanishing Carbon Pollution harms. But the problem with these crooked little schemes is that the whole world is actually watching. Anybody can do the analysis that i just did and show that this is nothing more than a trick. And sooner or later, consequences do come home to roost. Out in the real world the Pacific Island nation of cureabati is buying up land in fiji so it can evacuate its people there when rising seas engulf its islands and eliminate the nation. It is on its way of becoming a modern day atlantis lost forever to the waves and you can replicate that risk along shores of bangladesh and burma, malaysia, and the mal maldese. You can add in the lost fisheries that left the country for cooler waters. If you think thats just a hypothetical, ask connecticut and rhode island lo lobstermen about their catch. You can add in the expansion of the worlds desert areas that forces farmers crops and shepherds flocks away from their historic homes. You can add unprecedented storms powered up over warming seas. As bad as things have been in houston and florida and puerto rico, we are rich enough to rebuild, to throw billions of dollars at the problem and we are. Other places havent got those resources. Without the help, imagine that suffering. And to those who will suffer in the future, what do we say . What on that day of reckoning, on that judgment day do we tell all those people who suffered . Ha, ha, ha, do we say. We came up with this trick that wiped most of the suffering off our rates. We used the discount rate your suffering to virtually zero . Is that the kind of america we want to be . Remember the saying the power of americas example is more important than any example of our power. Some example we would be. Some city on a hill if that was the way we behaved. The Natural World does not care about selfserving or ideological arguments. The Natural World is governed by immutable laws of physics, chemistry, biology, and mathematics. Scott pruitts polluterfriendly mathematics just doesnt add up. As michael greenstone, an economist at the university of chicago who helped develop the social cost of carbon put it, pruitts plan and ill quote him here was not evidencebased policymaking. This was policybased evidence making. There is enormous pressure in the Trump Administration to get rid of the social cost of carb carbon. Whats bizarre about the Trump Administration is that they dont try to get rid of the social cost of carbon by getting rid of its social cost by lowering carbon emissions, by addressing the harms that it causes. They try to get rid of the social cost of carbon by getting rid of the scoring mechanism that counts all of that. Its like saying my team is winning because i tore down the scoreboard. Well, no. The world is getting clobbered out there by Carbon Pollution and the Climate Change that causes it. And tearing down the scoreboard doesnt help change the game on the field. You cannot just cook the books and reduce the social cost of carbon. For one thing, social cost of carbon analysis is too well established in the honest world. Courts have instructed federal agencies to factor social costs of carbon into their regulations. States are using social cost of carbon in their policymaking. Most major corporations, even exxonmobil factor a social cost of carbon into their own planning and accounting. The social cost of Carbon Pollution is at the heart of the International Monetary fund calculation that the fossil fuel industry gets an annual subsidy in the United States of 700 billion a year. Even to protect a multihundred billion dollar annual subsidy, scott pruitt just cant wish the social cost of carbon away, just cant stop counting it. Courts will take notice. They may take notice that these stunts are arbitrary and capricious under the administrative procedures act. They may take note that pruitt has massive conflicts of interest with his fossil fuel funders. They will surely note that the Supreme Court has said Greenhouse Gases are pollutants under the Clean Air Act and that e. P. A. Is legally obligated to regulate them. They will surely note that the e. P. A. Itself has determined that Greenhouse Gas emissions endanger the Public Health and welfare of current and future generations, a determination that the d. C. Circuit resoundedly upheld. But were not in an ordinary situation. Pruitt has a long history doing the bidding of the fossil fuel industry. In the recent frontline documentary war on the e. P. A. , bob murray of murray energy, a strong pruitt supporter, bragged about giving this administration a threepage action plan on environmental regulations and bragged that the first page was already done. Thats the world we live in now where the regulated industry brags that it controls its regulator, gives it direction, and that its work is already being done. Courts that look at any rule proposed by scott pruitt must recognize that there is near zero chance he is operating in good faith. Our nations environmental regulator went in captured and has stayed captured by our nations biggest polluters. Scott pruitt is not their regulator. He is their instrument. That is a conflict of interest. I recently hosted my eighth annual Rhode Island Energy environment and oceans day bringing together members of our Business Community from the public sector, from government, and academia to hear directly from experts about the latest environmental news and initiatives. I was very excited to be joined by excellent keynote speakers, including former secretary of state john kerry who has done such magnificent work on oceans particularly but on Climate Change generally leading us into the paris climate agreement. Also former United States special envoy for Climate Change todd stearn who has labored in these vineyards low many, many years and ocean advocate, oash a board member sam wall derston. Sam walterston called on us to tackle todays ocean and environmental problems with what he called a battleready kind of optimism, a battleready kind of optimism. So let us go forward with a battleready kind of optimism to clean the polluters swamp at e. P. A. , to clean our earths atmosphere and oceans of unbridled carbon emissions, and to clear the reputation of our beloved country of the o o bl liquy it is rapidly earning at the hands of a corrupt industry. I yield the floor. The presiding officer the senator from virginia. Mr. Kaine mr. President , i rise to talk about the Childrens Health insurance program. We all know that health care is the most important thing in any persons life and in their familys life. And theres probably no Health Care Issue that is more intense than a parents concern about the health of their children. I i think all of the offices in this building heard about that from their parents while we have been debating about what to do about the Affordable Care act. We heard parents talk about the health of their kids. I rise to talk about another Critical Program that i hope we will act in a bipartisan way to reauthorize, the children Health Insurance program or chip. Chip builds on medicaid and earns families who earn too much to be eligible for medicaid an insurance option for their kids. In talking about families who avail themselves of this option in virginia ten years ago we didnt do a very good job of enrolling kids in chip, but we have gotten better at it. Its interesting to hear parents talk about it. They will often talk about how important chip is to them when their child is sick or when their child is injured. But it is also important to them when their child is perfectly fine when they are not sick or injured, but as a parent you go to bed with anxiety every night if you dont have insurance. This is a program that provides not Just Health Care but peace of mind for parents and their kids. The Family Access to medicaid insurance and chipfunded medicaid, the state provides coverage to nearly 193,000 children. Chip alone, the specific chip program, covers 66,000 kids in virginia and also pregnant moms 1,100 pregnant moms are covered right now. It includes hospital visits, eyeglasses, which is critical to be successful in school, immunizations and checkups for kids up to 18 with minimal costsharing. In virginia, since 2009, when i was governor we extended chip to also allow dental coverage and that has been really important to children and their families. The program is one of the Success Stories in since it was created in 1997. As the president knows, this program expired on september 30. Despite bipartisan work on the committee, we have not seen a reauthorization bill come to the senate floor. The uncertainty surrounding chip has already started to have an influence on my constituents and the commonsense of every member of this body. According to our Virginia Department that administers the program, its the department of medical assistance services, the state will be forced to send letters theres an administrative process that requires if a program is to be terminated, we will be forced to send letters on december 1, 2017, notifying families that theres an impending loss of coverage. If there is not a reauthorization bill done by that time, imagine the anxiety of the families getting a letter in the maim box saying that the mailbox saying that this chip program is about to expire. This will, at a minimum, cause a great deal of anxiety and confusion even if we come back and fix it, but if we dont fix it, obviously the anxiety and confusion becomes much more catastrophic for the families. After we send out learts telling letters telling families that they have to prepare for the elimination of this program, the enrollment will freeze on january 1. By the end of january, and this differs with each state, virginia will have insufficient funds to continue the program. There are some states that are already experiencing running out of the funds that they have for the program when we didnt finish the program by september 30, they have a little virginia has a little cushion. Here is something that makes matters worse in virginia. Our legislature is a parttime legislature. They do not come back in until january and that will make it really difficult. We cant find time for solutions before then because they are out of session and when they come back, that would be a lot to face in two weeks that this program is going to expire. Needless to say the kids who use chip in virginia are in all parts of the state. Just to give you some example, the Hampton Roads area, virginia beach, northern neck, has over 5,000 kids who rely on chip. Far west virginia, where my wifes family is from, appalachia, nearly 6,000 kids rely on chip. It is a highpopulation area and it is used in an important way by those families. The Shenandoah County area has those who rely on the program. There isnt a county where we dont rely on this program. The positive words from my colleagues, senators hatch and wyden, introduced, keeping kids secure act, which is bipartisan, to extend the chip program for five years to give states sufficient time to so families dont face the uncertainty saying that the program may terminate. I rise today to urge my colleagues to strongly support bringing this bill to the floor and providing certainty to the families and children who rely on chip. Even if we save it at year end, you know, in a deal at the end of december, the the fact of all of these families getting letters on december 1 saying that the program is possibly going to expire is a needless uncertainty and we should try to avoid that if we can, not just in virginia, but in every state. My senior senator, senator warner is a strong supporter of the program. He preceded me as governor. He was the one who really focused on doing a better job of enrolling kids in the program. I give him credit for that and i will take my i helped to add dental health. We asked that the majority leader bring this to the floor quickly on behalf of virginia children, it looks like this bill with a number of cosponsors and the historic nature of this program, if we could get a floor vote on it, i think we can pass it today and send it to the house and do so in a way to avoid sending termination letters to families and needlessly increase their anxiety. If we can bring this to the floor, i think we can get it passed. It is an urgent issue for children across the current. Country. Children are not wandering thinking about their health care, but their parents are worrying desperately about their health care and this bill would help both children and their families. With that, mr. President , i yield the floor. I note the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call quorum call a senator mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from missouri. Mr. Blunt mr. President , if there is a quorum call, i move we suspend it. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Blunt mr. President , were this week moving to confirm four circuit judges, and its a good week because of that talk about the judiciary, the Critical Role the judiciary plays, and actually the unique power that our constitution gave the courts to do the job that they were supposed to do. They were to provide a check and balance on the other two coequal branches of government, the executive branch and the legislative branch. The federal judiciary is most importantly to provide americans with a avenue to seek the rule of law, an avenue to know that youre going to be impacted by what the law says and what the constitution says. It is a fundamental right of how we conduct ourselves, how we seek justice, how people should be able to make decisions about their family and about their business and about their financial future as well as their personal future. Thats why judges that believe in the rule of law and what the law says and what the constitution says are so important. And thats why its important to have qualified and wellgrounded judges. Not just people who are really good lawyers, but people who have an appreciation for how important it is that others can absolutely rely on the law and the constitution. Those can be changed, and theres a way to change them. But the way to change them is seldom at the federal bench. According to the Administrative Office of the United States courts, as of this morning there are 148 vacancies on the federal judiciary. Now that includes two vacancies on the eighth Circuit Court of appeals. It includes the circuit judges that we have not yet fully complied with their nomination and approved their nomination this week. But 148 vacancies of jobs that are to be filled for as long as the person is able to serve. Thats why healthy judges, younger judges, judges who are well grounded can have such an impact for so long. You know, the first major judicial accomplishment this year in terms of the nominating process was judge gorsuch who 29 years from now will be younger than three of the judges hes currently serving with. So these are decisions that last well beyond presidency, well beyond the tenure of the senators that vote to confirm. And we have a chance to do that now. In one of these judicial circuits, the eighth circuit, is one that my state, missouri, is in. As a matter of fact, the most recent native shows while there are a handful of judges in that circuit, a third of all the cases filed in the eighth circuit come from our state, from september 2015 to september 2016. I would imagine that number will be about the same again this year. And reshaping the judiciary generally as well as what happens in the eighth circuit are important. At the start of President Trumps term, 12 of all the positions in the federal judiciary were vacant. The Congressional Research Service Found that not since president clinton took office has a president had the constitutional obligation to fill more judicial vacancies at the start of his term than President Trump. I certainly believe he made the right choice when he selected judge gorsuch to serve on the court. I have been enthusiastic about the other judges that he has nominated, including the four that weve had a chance to talk about and will continue to have a chance to talk about this week. I think President Trump will continue to nominate judges that will, first of all, Pay Attention to the constitution and what it says, that will apply the rule of law, and will not legislate from the bench. Those three hallmarks of how this senate should define and this president has so far defined what a judge is supposed to do not only can happen, but can happen for, at this moment 12 , or at least on january 20, 12 of the judicial positions. And that number will continue to grow as judges for whatever reason leave the bench, as judges decide to take early retirement. So if the end of the four years of this administration we have filled all the vacancies that occur, well fill more than 12 of those lifetime appointments. So its really important that the senate act to confirm these nominees to fill as many vacancies as are there to be filled. Last month the federalist reported that, quote, democrats are forcing more cloture votes than any early presidency and demanding the full 30 hours of floor time per nominee that the senate rules allow. I said yesterday, mr. President , at the press stakeout that we had yesterday outside of this room that the senate was designed to protect the rights of the minority, and thats a good thing. Just the fact that it would take six entire years to replace the entire senate means that the country has to stay focused on one set of ideas if all the senators are going to reflect that one set of ideas much longer than the twoyear opportunity to change everybody in the house. Also the understanding that the senate provided that protection for minorities to be heard in a big and diverse democracy like we have. Thats a good thing. But i also said in the points we were making yesterday that the protections for the minority have always been held on to, appreciated, protected until the minority decides to abuse those protections. And when that happens, the minority always loses the protection. So what weve had over and over again, 47 times this year, as compared to one time with president obama for nonjudicial appointments and five times in the entire first obama year up until this time in october, i believe, no times for either president bush, one time for president clinton. 47 times this year the minority has taken a judicial nomination or another nomination and said were going to insist on 30 hours of debate because the rules allow 30 hours of debate. Well, the rules allow 30 hours of debate for contentious nominees. The rules allow 30 hours of debate when theres really going to be a debate. Last week we had 30 hours of debate on a judge. 20 minutes were spent talking about that judge, in support of him. Zero spent opposing that judge. But 30 hours that could have been used for other purposes was gone. And, frankly, i think thats the reason the 30 hours was demanded, so the other work of the senate has to be set aside so that we can do the equally important work of letting the president put people in vacant positions that need to be filled. And that 30 hours will be changed if the minority continues to abuse it. Its happened in the entire history of the senate. But thats what happens when you abuse these rules that protect you and give you rights. It will happen again here if this doesnt change. We see the same thing happening this week. Were going to have weve had ots of time this week lots of time this week, 30 hours of debate, final vote, democrats and republicans vote. In fact, the judge i mentioned a minute ago, 28 democrats voted for that judge. 30 hours of debate. Not a l single critical word spoken in debate about the judge. A majority of the democrats and virtually all the republicans vote for that judge. Thats not an acceptable way to stop the senate from getting to the other work the senate needs to. This is not a basketball, basketball without a clock where they used to effectively play the delay game. Well, the delay game got abused. The clock became part of the system. And the clock will run here faster too if our colleagues dont begin to see the importance of what we do here. And while these nominees have had cloture votes, president obama, again, i think only one on a judge in his first year, there is one nominee in the eighth district, the district, again, that missouris in for, where a minnesota Supreme Court justice, david strauss, has had his nomination held up. There is a rule sometimes thats been used in the senate almost always if a judge is being replaced that only affects your state, where a senator can say im really opposed to that. And in most of the history of the senate, that kind of hold has been honored. It has not been honored on judges that represent another state, many states or will be a judge in a circuit for many states just because they happen to come from your state. The American Bar Association has said Justice Strauss is well qualified. Its very highest rating. He received his bachelors degree with the highest distinction from the university of kansas, another state in this circuit. His m. B. A. From the university of kansas. His law degree from the university of kansas. He clerked on the u. S. Supreme court before practicing law and teaching at the university of minnesota. And not only was he appointed to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court of minnesota, but he was elected. In fact, he was elected and got more votes than the person whos holding his nomination got when he was elected to that job. So i just urge mile colleagues to not only urge my colleagues to not only support his nomination, but to do what we need to do to get these nominees to the floor, let everybody express their opinion and the time needed to do that. But not to continue to abuse the rules, not to continue to hold these important vacancies hostage to getting nothing else done because we have 30 hours of debate where nobody decides to come and debate. By the way, if we want to continue to allow senators to hold a nomination in a circuit that their state happens to be part of, in the eighth circuit, most of the work before that court, more than any other state, comes from missouri. Wed be glad to have an additional judge. And theres nothing that would prevent that. But the right thing to do here is to let a wellqualified person come to the senate floor, be debated if theres debate to be had, be voted on and take one of those significant 140plus vacancies on the federal judiciary and fill them with a person thats well qualified, just like this week in four other circuits we intend to put three women and one man on those courts who can serve long and hopefully be able to serve long and well and take their important philosophy to the court with them when they go. And with that, mr. President , i would yield the floor. A senator mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from west virginia. Mrs. Capito thank you, mr. President. As we heard my colleague from missouri saying, weve got a great opportunity this week to confirm four out standing individuals outstanding individuals to the federal Circuit Court. These nominees are wellqualified individuals who have demonstrated a strong understanding of the proper role that a judge plays in our constitutional system. Im especially