Judicial Nominations

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCHATZ. Madam President, it is very important that the American people know that Republicans are still trying to take away their healthcare. Last year, Republicans filed a lawsuit arguing that the entire Affordable Care Act should be invalidated, and now they want to give a promotion to the person who led that effort at the Department of Justice. That person's name is Chad Readler, currently a Deputy Assistant Attorney General at the Justice Department.

Last year, he filed an argument on behalf of the Department of Justice to take away protections for people with preexisting conditions. The American Medical Association said that Mr. Readler's argument would ``have a devastating impact on doctors, patients, and the American health system as a whole,'' that it ``would cause 32 million people to become uninsured,'' and that it would double insurance premiums.

The American Medical Association was not alone here. Lawyers at the Justice Department refused to sign their names to Mr. Readler's brief. One senior career official actually resigned in protest, and Senator Lamar Alexander said that his arguments were ``as farfetched as any I've ever heard.''

On the same day that Mr. Readler filed his argument to take away people's healthcare, the White House nominated him to a lifetime appointment to the bench on the Sixth Circuit. They wanted to promote him because of his good work suing in Federal court trying to invalidate the entire healthcare system--the entire healthcare law.

We should not sign off on this nominee--not if we care about protecting the health of our constituents, especially those who have cancer, asthma, diabetes, or any other preexisting medical condition.

We should also be wary of putting someone on the Sixth Circuit who makes the kind of poor, farfetched argument that Mr. Readler made, because this isn't purely a question of public policy. If it were public policy, you would definitely say: Don't take 32 million people and take away their healthcare--right? If it were public policy, you would say: Don't do the thing that is going to double premiums.

This is about what kind of a lawyer he is. This is about what kind of a judge he would be. The White House may want to reward his efforts, but we don't have to.

If you look at Mr. Readler's record and feel that, OK, he tried to deport the Dreamers. Even if you concede past his defense of the Muslim ban or his discrimination against a gay couple who wanted to get married or even if you don't mind that he is trying to make it harder for people to vote or his argument to allow kids under 18 to be sentenced to death--even if none of that bothers you--it should bother you that a Senator in Mr. Readler's home State has not returned a blue slip. It should really bother you. If you say you are for protecting people with preexisting conditions, here is your opportunity.

It is one thing to say: Well, we would never do that. We would never take away protections for people with preexisting conditions. After all, we all know people with preexisting conditions.

I have no doubt that is the actual sentiment among Members of the Senate on both sides. Here is the thing. This week is the week to walk the talk. This week is the week to decide whether or not you are for protecting people with preexisting conditions, because you have a guy who led the effort to gut protections for people with preexisting conditions.

Mr. Readler is unqualified for other reasons, but now we have a litmus test on where you stand on preexisting conditions. It is not enough to say it in your campaign debate. It is not enough to say it in the hallway and say: Hey, we want to protect people.

Here is your moment. Someone who has dedicated some portion of his professional life to gut the American healthcare system is now being given a permanent job on the Sixth Circuit. Everybody should vote no.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source