Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I will have a unanimous consent request after I make a few brief remarks. I thank my friends, the Senators from Hawaii and Maryland, for joining me here today.

We all know it is the job of the Senate to keep up with the need to confirm judges, but our friends on the other side of the aisle aren't holding up their end of the bargain. The judicial confirmation process has been at a crawl for years. Now it has come to a functional standstill, as noncontroversial nominations--some of which were approved out of committee by overwhelming votes, the majority of Republicans and the majority of Democrats--languish on the Executive Calendar.

Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle did their best to slow the pace of confirmations when the Senate was under Democratic leadership, and now they are sluggishly moving nominations under a Senate they control. That has culminated in an irresponsible partisan blockade of President Obama's Supreme Court pick.

Let's talk about some real numbers. More than 1 year into this new Congress, the Republican leadership has allowed only 17 judges to be confirmed. How many months do we have here? We had 12 in the last year of this Congress, and we are now at the end of April, so that is 4. So that is 16--1 a month.

Let me show the contrast. I say to my dear friend, our majority leader, this is the number that counts because the analogy was the last 2 years of the Bush administration when there was a Democratic majority. Then, a Republican President and a Democratic majority; now, a Democratic President and a Republican majority. They confirmed 17 and we confirmed 68. This has consequences--real consequences.

The number of vacancies has risen from 43 to 79 since the Republicans took over the majority. That didn't happen when President Bush was President and made nominations. Twenty-eight judicial emergencies. For people seeking justice--they can't get it very speedily because of the obstruction of judges.

There are 20 noncontroversial judges on the Executive Calendar. We are urging our colleagues to let these noncontroversial judges go through. Very simply, we are urging our colleagues to do their job.

I know the leader wants to have the Senate move along, and we have tried to go along whenever it is possible. But this is a glaring example where it is easy to do your job, where it is easy to move things forward, and all we face is obstruction and for no voiced reason.

I would like to know why the judges who I will ask for unanimous consent--it is a smaller list than my colleague from Hawaii has asked to go forward with. I would love to know a single reason why any of them shouldn't be sitting on the bench.

307, 357, 358, 359, 362, and 363; further, that the Senate proceed to vote without intervening action or debate on the nominations; that if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source