Floor Statements

Madam President, I am pleased that my friend Senator McConnell and I have been able to reach an agreement to approve a number of judicial nominations in the coming weeks. The senior Senator from Vermont, Chairman Leahy, has kindly added his wisdom to make this a better agreement, and for that I am very grateful. This is a victory for our Nation's justice system.

While I still believe the Senate should confirm all these nominations this afternoon to address the judicial vacancy crisis we face in this country, the step forward is one we should all feel good about. The Senate will hold up-or-down votes on seven district court judges before the end of this work period. We will vote on another five district court and two circuit court nominations by Monday, May 7.

Among the 14 judges, the Senate will consider Miranda Du. Miranda Du is a very well known lawyer in Nevada, but the interesting thing about this good woman is that she is representative of the true American success story.

She was born in Vietnam. At the end of the war in Vietnam, people who were of Vietnamese ancestry could not leave if they were fullblooded Vietnamese. If they weren't, as Miranda was, they let them go, and she left Vietnam with her family in a boat when she was just 8 years old. She was in refugee camps and finally, when she was 9 years old, wound up in Alabama--not, of course, speaking any English--with her family. She speaks--not that it matters--without a single trace of any accent.

She is such a good lawyer, and I was so happy when I introduced her before the Judiciary Committee at a hearing. Her parents were there, her family was there. It was a wonderful opportunity to see what America is all about.

As I have indicated, she has extensive litigation experience and an enormous love and appreciation for Nevada. I look forward to confirming this woman who has such a tremendous dedication to public service.

Approving 14 new judges speaks to the progress we can make when we here in the Senate work together. More work remains to fill all the Nation's vacant judicial seats and ease the backlog of cases in our courts. We can't jeopardize the right to a fair and speedy trial for 160 million Americans who now live in districts with judicial vacancies. Some of them even have judicial vacancies that are emergencies. It is crucial that bipartisan cooperation continue and the pace of confirmations move forward. With 1 in 10 Federal judgeships vacant in our country, more delays would circumvent the will of the people.

The American Bar Association says that shortage of judges and the backup in our courts is ``bad for business, it's unfair to individuals, and it . . . ultimately costs taxpayers money.''

This shortage of judges is also unnecessary.

Again, I am pleased there has been agreement to confirm these 14 judges without wasting any more of the Senate's time.

I think we can all agree, regardless of political party, that we must act quickly on the small business jobs bill that was passed overwhelmingly by the House. Democrats are eager to move this bill forward, which will improve innovators' access to capital and streamline how companies sell stock.

Democrats will also introduce bipartisan legislation to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank--referred to as the Ex-Im Bank--which will create 300,000 jobs and generate more than $1 billion of new revenue for our country. The minority leader has supported the Export-Import Bank in the past. This legislation also has the total support of the national chamber of commerce. So it will build on the important work we have done this week to help create jobs. It isn't a 2.8 million job creator as is our highway bill, but it is an important piece of legislation to allow capital formation to be made much more rapidly.

Today the Senate passed this Transportation jobs bill which is such a job creator that it is one of the rare occasions we have here in Senate where we can really look to creating, with one vote, millions of jobs. Today we also, of course, as I have just indicated, reached a bipartisan agreement to ease the delays in our Nation's courts. Passing a small business jobs bill that helps companies expand and export their products would be yet another bipartisan accomplishment of which the Senate can be proud. To that, I refer the Ex-Im Bank.

I appreciate my friend from Iowa being patient. It seems that there are times when he wants to really speak, and sometimes I don't know he is coming, but it seems I show up at about the same time.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 11 a.m., Thursday, March 15, the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 334, H.R. 3606, the IPO bill.

Mr. President, I appreciate the work done by the Presiding Officer and the junior Senator from Oregon on this most important piece of legislation, and especially the problems the two Senators I mentioned believe is evident with this legislation. I appreciate the opportunity I have had to work with the two of them today. We will continue to do that.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Thursday, March 15, 2012, at 1:45 p.m., the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations: Calendar Nos. 408 and 461; that there be 15 minutes for debate equally divided in the usual form; that upon the use or yielding back of the time, the Senate proceed to vote, without intervening action or debate, on Calendar No. 408 and No. 461, in that order; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order; that any related statements be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to consideration of S. Res. 396.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Ayotte be added as a cosponsor of this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related to the resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I am told there is a bill at the desk due for its first reading.

Mr. President, I now ask for a second reading and, for purposes of placing the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until Thursday, March 15, at 9:30 a.m.; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following any leader remarks, the Senate proceed to a period of morning business until 11 a.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the majority controlling the first half and the Republicans controlling the second half; that following morning business, the Senate proceed to consideration of H.R. 3606, the IPO bill we have spoken of previously and as indicated under the previous order.

Mr. President, at about 2 p.m. tomorrow, there will be two votes on confirmation of Groh and Fitzgerald to be trial judges in the Federal judiciary. Additional votes are possible.

If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order.

Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will be in a period of morning business for 1 hour, with the majority controlling the first half and the Republicans controlling the final half. Following morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of S. 1813, the surface transportation act. There will be two rollcall votes in relation to the DeMint and Bingaman amendments at noon. The Senate will recess until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus meetings. At 2:15 p.m. there could be as many as 20 rollcall votes this afternoon to complete action on the Transportation bill.

Mr. President, I am told there are two bills at the desk due for a second reading.

Mr. President, I object to further proceedings regarding these two bills.

Mr. President, today we resume consideration of the most important piece of jobs legislation we have had here in a long time; that is, the highway bill. But it is more than a highway bill, it is a surface transportation bill that deals with all aspects of helping our failing bridges, and there are 70,000 of those. Twenty percent of our highways are in nonsafe conditions. We have problems with our mass transportation system, rails, and other such things, so we have to move forward.

Building this Nation's infrastructure with this legislation alone will save or create 2.8 million jobs. This is an effort to build a world-class transportation system that was started during the Presidency of Dwight Eisenhower. Every President since then has recognized the need to go forward with the vision General Eisenhower had. We must renew that commitment. The Presidents in recent years have gone out of their way to do that. President Reagan gave a number of speeches about how important it was that we begin to renew the commitment we should have to infrastructure in this country. President Clinton did the same.

The legislation is very important, and a commitment to the renewal of a vision of General Eisenhower is the essence of this bipartisan bill. It has the endorsement of one of the most conservative Members of the Senate and one of the most liberal Members of the Senate. I was disappointed that it took as long as it did to get where we are, but we are here. We invoked cloture quite a long time ago, and it has taken

more than a month to come within sight of the completion of this bill. I am pleased that we are on track to dispense with the remaining amendments and vote on final passage during today's business.

I am hopeful the House will act immediately to pass this bipartisan compromise rather than pursue what we have all read about--an extreme, ideological bill they were considering last month. It failed every test, including the test of their own caucus. The Republican caucus said: No, we cannot do this.

The highway bill is important to the Democratic Members and Republican Members of the House, as it is to Democratic and Republican Members of the Senate. I would hope the Speaker understands it is not good for this country to have a situation where he tries to pass everything with a majority of the majority. What that means is the Republicans have a majority in the House--and I served in the House, and that is not how things were done with Bob Michel, who was the Republican leader at the time, Tip O'Neill, who was the Democratic leader at the time, and Jim Wright thereafter. Bob Michel worked with both of them to get legislation done. What they tried to do was get to the magic number of 218--that is the majority in the House--and they got those votes from Democrats and Republicans. So I hope my friend the Speaker won't just try to get this surface transportation bill done with Republicans. Let the Democrats voice their opinion as to what should happen. That is the way we should do it. Passing a bipartisan transportation bill the President can sign would be a victory for both parties and our country.

The Senate's pressing business doesn't end with completion of this bill. We have a small business jobs bill that was passed overwhelmingly by the House and is supported by President Obama. Last night I had a conversation on the floor publicly with the Republican whip, Senator Kyl of Arizona, and we talked about the need to get this done. We are going to move forward on this expeditiously. There are always bumps in the road. I hope there will be very few bumps in the road.

I have not had an opportunity to talk to my friend the Republican leader, but I was told this morning that the ranking member of the Banking Committee, my friend from Alabama, Senator Shelby, has indicated he wants to make some improvements in the bill we received from the House. I suggest he work with Senator Johnson. If they can do something on a bipartisan basis and do it quickly, I will be happy to take a look at it, but we need to move forward. I think you kind of get the message when there are about 390 votes for a bill and 20 against it, so I think we have to move forward.

The one thing I am going to do is have a perfecting amendment prepared that will allow us to move forward on reauthorizing the Ex-Im Bank. I hope we can do that. It is something that is broadly supported, and the business community thinks it is extremely important. As I mentioned last night, Mr. McNerney, the head of Boeing, said it is a tremendously important bill for the airline industry, which is so important to the economy of our country. It is not only important to the airline industry, it is important to other segments of our industrial base. It is an important piece of legislation, and I hope we can add that to the small business jobs bill. If we can't, I understand, but it would be a shame to miss the opportunity to do that.

We are interested in this IPO bill that has been supported by the House and the President of the United States. I am convinced it will spur small business growth. It will not create the jobs we have on the highway bill, but it is good for job growth. It will bring more capital into the business world, and we have needed that for several years now. It would streamline the way companies sell stock. I look forward to working with my friend the Republican leader to finalize a path forward on this bipartisan legislation.

In the coming days, the Senate must also consider postal reform legislation, reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, cybersecurity, and additional measures to create jobs and improve our economy. The only thing preventing the Senate from moving quickly to tackle these items, including the bipartisan small business jobs bill, is what we have had this whole Congress: obstructionism by my friends the Republicans. They have forced the Senate to wait weeks on unrelated amendments to this bill, this bipartisan surface transportation bill. I hope they are not going to hold up progress on the small business jobs bill. I am confident they will not. I really hope that is the case.

Mr. President, yesterday I filed cloture on 17 consensus judicial nominations. I have worked with the Republicans for months to find a way forward for a timely confirmation for many of these nominees, including some who have been waiting for up-or-down votes since October. Yesterday I had a visual aid--and I will show it during the caucus today--to show what happened in the Clinton years, the Bush years, and the Obama years. It is so clear what has happened. And it really doesn't fully represent what happened because in the Clinton years we had dozens and dozens of nominees who were what we called pocket-vetoed--they just wouldn't hold hearings on them. But with the length of time the judges were reported out of committee--Clinton, a few days; Bush, a few days; and, of course, now we are talking about many months with the Obama nominations--that is not fair. They should all be entitled to an up-or-down vote, especially when they came out of the committee so overwhelmingly, with rare exception. There is no reason we should eat up even 1 day of precious time the Senate has to pass these commonsense measures when we can do it so quickly.

President Obama's judicial nominees have waited five or six times longer than President Bush's nominations for confirmation, and that time has increased and is not going down. The Senate once confirmed 18 of President Bush's nominations in a single day. There is no justification for obstruction on matters that ought to be routine. There is too much to do. The Senate simply doesn't have the luxury to waste any more time.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I know when people talk, they are always afraid people aren't listening. Maybe my friend the Republican leader's intention was diverted from my presentation this morning.

There is nothing to fight about. I just said we are going to move to this bill as quickly as we can. I said I have heard that the ranking member of the Banking Committee wants to take a look at this. I encourage him to do so and to talk to Senator Johnson. I said we are going to have an opportunity to vote on a perfecting amendment-- something I thought everyone wanted; Republicans want it, Democrats want it, the business community wants it, the workers of this country need it--to reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank which goes out of business at the end of May. That will slow this bill up maybe a half an hour--one- half hour.

I have said many times, if we are going to have a fight, make it over something worthwhile. There is nothing to fight about here. We are going to move to this as quickly as we can. We know that under the rules of the Senate, we have to vote on 17 judges who have been held up, one of those back to October of last year. So I would be happy to get rid of all of those judges, to have them approved, and move to this bill. We are going to move this bill as quickly as possible.

My friend the Republican leader spoke volumes when he said this is a small but important bill. We realize that. Those are his words. This is an IPO bill dealing with initial public offerings. We have heard for months and months that small businesses can't find capital to do the things they need to do. This bill is a step in that direction. I support it. My caucus will support it. So I tell everyone within the sound of my voice: We are going to move to this bill as quickly as we can.

I object.

Mr. President, I am stunned by a controversy over nothing. Under the rules of the Senate, we filed cloture, because there has been stalling and obstruction on the lives of 17 people. I didn't file on the appellate judges, only trial judges. Each one of these men and women's lives has been brought to a standstill. They have the opportunity of a lifetime to be able to become a Federal trial court judge. They shouldn't have to wait until October. I say to my friend: We can approve these judges in 1 minute. Let's do that. It is not fair to say the lives of these 17 men and women are unimportant and put it over until some later time.

We have no problem with the IPO bill we got from the House. How could we? It got 390 votes in the House. The President of the United States supports it. We support it. We want to get this done and we will do it as quickly as we can. It may not be 10 minutes from now or 24 hours from now, but we are going to move to it as quickly as we can, and we can move to it very quickly. As soon as we finish this highway bill, we could move to those judges, get that issue disposed of, and then move to this. It might take an hour after the highway bill, but that is about all.

I would be happy to yield.

I say to the chairman of the Judiciary Committee--and I mentioned this yesterday at some length and I believe the Presiding Officer was here when I did that--more than half of the people in America today are living in areas where there has been declared a judicial emergency. Nevada is one of them. We have courts where these judges are overwhelmed with work. I said yesterday I don't want these judges to act as if they were night court judges dealing with traffic cases. As I said yesterday, these judges deal with what we used to refer to when I practiced law as: ``What are you trying to do, make a Federal case out of it?'' They said that because there is no finer law dispensing anyplace in the world than in our Federal court system. And we can't do that when these men and women are overwhelmed with work.

The circuit court level is one thing. It is too bad they are overwhelmed with work. But on the trial court level, they are dealing with everyday problems that people have, including accidents, antitrust cases, businesses having gone bankrupt, and all the other things the Federal court has jurisdiction over.

My friend is absolutely right. We should not only be concerned about the 17 people who have been selected by the President of the United States to be a judge after having gotten a signoff from the Republican Senator in their State. I should have talked not only about them individually but what they represent, and that is trying to do something about the emergencies that exist for more than half of Americans.

Here is my idea. I have a great idea. My friend the Republican leader said these judges are all going to be approved anyway, so I have an idea. Let's go to this IPO bill immediately after we finish the highway bill, with the agreement that we will dispose of these judges immediately after that. That sounds good to me. I am happy to do that. How about that? Before my friend leaves, how about a deal on that? As soon as we finish this highway bill, we will move to the IPO bill, and as soon as we finish that and get it out of the Senate, we will then have up-or-down votes on those 17 judges. This does not include an agreement on the appellate judges. We will deal with those at a subsequent time. How about that?

I will say again to my friend, I would hope that what we could do is when we finish the highway bill, go to the IPO bill, and then as soon as we finish that have an up-or-down vote on these judges. I would be happy to work in any reasonable fashion.

It is obvious that the jobs bill has nothing to do with the holding up of these judges as has been articulated by my friend. It is a question of stalling things, as has happened all this Congress. As indicated, more than half the American people are in areas where there are judicial emergencies. It is important we get this dispensation of justice done, and do it quickly.

The controversy on the IPO bill does not exist. There is not any. I would suggest to my friend, though, we have very many things left to do. The postal service; we do not want it to go broke. We have the Violence Against Women Act we need to get done. We have all these judges, of course. We have cybersecurity. So if we move--and I am going to move quickly--to this IPO bill, I cannot imagine why we would need any amendments.

I indicated that out of my right as majority leader, I can offer a perfecting amendment, and that would be to find out if the body feels strongly about what they have said publicly: that the Ex-Im Bank should be part of the bill. That would hold the bill up for one vote, about 15 minutes.

But in addition to that, we are not going to have a knockdown, drag- out on the IPO. If everybody loves the House bill so much, that is what we will vote on.

You have heard the expression: fill the tree. We will fill the tree and go to the IPO bill. If everybody loves it so much, we should get it to the President's desk as fast as we can.

I yield back.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, the Republican leader and I have had discussions this afternoon, but I think it is fair to say he and I both believe we should finish this bill tomorrow. There is a very important event tonight--it may not mean much to anyone outside the Senate family, but it is to us, being able to recognize Susan Collins on a very special occasion in her life--and we are going to leave here so people who want to go to that event can do so.

We will come in tomorrow, and we will have about three or four votes to complete. We are having some other conversations, Senator McConnell and I, about other matters, and we will discuss that later. There will be no more votes tonight.