Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Page S4780]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NOMINATIONS
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, on another matter, all week the Senate
has continued our productivity in overcoming partisan opposition and
confirming the President's well-qualified nominees for important
offices.
We have confirmed the newest judge on the Ninth Circuit. Yesterday we
confirmed three district judges by overwhelming bipartisan margins--78
to 15, 80 to 14, and 85 to 10. Those are the margins on three district
judges. Clearly, we are not exactly talking about radioactive,
controversial nominees here, not when 78 votes for confirmation is the
low end.
Nevertheless, as has become typical over the past 2\1/2\ years, our
Democratic colleagues insisted on cloture votes to cut off debate
before we could confirm any of them. In fact, we have yet to voice-vote
a single judicial nominee this entire Congress. We haven't voice-voted
a single judicial nominee this entire Congress.
It is really a shame. It is not the precedent the Senate ought to be
setting for these lower tier nominations. Of course, we have confirmed
them nonetheless.
Before the end of this week, the Senate will have done the same for
three other lower level nominees to the executive branch.
Weeks like this were impossible before my Republican colleagues and I
did the right thing for the institution a few months back and moved the
Senate back toward our historic norms for nominations of this sort. We
argued that Senate Democrats were mindlessly obstructing even the least
controversial nominees just for obstruction's sake.
Our colleagues across the aisle insisted, no, the majority would be
ramming through these extreme individuals and cutting off intense
debate that these extreme nominees deserve. Well, who is right? Well,
one more time for good measure: 78 to 15, 80 to 14, and 85 to 10.
Enough said.
It is particularly ironic that some of my friends across the aisle
elect to complain that the Senate is spending too much time on
nominations--the Presiding Officer has heard that--spending too much
time on nominations. I am not making this up. We actually hear
protestations from the Democratic side that confirming these men and
women is taking too long, as though it weren't totally obvious to
everyone that their own unprecedented delaying tactics are the only
reason these nominees have not been quickly confirmed in big batches on
a voice vote.
It is quite the two-step: Democrats systemically drag their heels for
2\1/2\ years and counting and then complain we are not moving fast
enough. Well, if it weren't clear by now, the tactics are not going to
work. The Senate is going to press on. We are going to do our job.
Today, we will press on despite 492 days of obstruction--492 days of
obstruction--and confirm Peter Wright, the President's nominee to serve
as--listen to this--an Assistant Administrator at EPA. He has been
waiting for 492 days.
As it happens, we will also vote on two Kentuckians--Robert King and
John Pallasch. Mr. King has been nominated to serve as Assistant
Secretary for Postsecondary Education. He comes with an impressive
record of experience in higher education administration and advocacy at
home in the Bluegrass State and beyond. Mr. Pallasch has been tapped
for Assistant Secretary of Labor. His resume includes service as
director of the Kentucky Office of Employment and Training as well as
previous service with the Department as Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Mine Safety and Health.
I will be proud to support each of these well-qualified nominees as
their senior Senator from Kentucky but moreover as someone who believes
that the American President deserves to have his team in place and that
citizens ought to be governed by the government they actually voted
for.
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Hyde-Smith). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________