Friday, May 10, 2013

Grassley Reminds Agencies of Key Whistleblower Protections, Seeks Compliance Details

WASHINGTON - Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa today wrote to 15 government agencies, reminding them of recently enacted whistleblower protections and seeking information on their compliance with the new law.

"Whistleblowers risk their careers to point out government waste, fraud and abuse," Grassley said.  "Without them, the public wouldn't know about a lot of problems that had to be exposed to get fixed. Our government would be the weaker for it.  Protections for whistleblower communications with Congress and agency watchdogs are critical for whistleblowers' good work to continue."

Grassley wrote to the major executive branch agencies about the recently enacted Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act, which codified an "anti-gag" provision he introduced every year.  The provision makes explicit that agency nondisclosure agreements do not apply to communications with Congress or reporting violations and/or misconduct to an Inspector General, or any other whistleblower protection.  Agency nondisclosure agreements must include specific disclaimers to that effect, and those disclaimers must be posted on agency websites.

Grassley asked each agency for information including all forms, policies, or agreements mentioning communications with Congress used within the last five years and a detailed statement of the various efforts taken to post the "anti-gag" provision on the agency website.

Grassley wrote to the Department of State, Department of the Treasury, Department of Defense, Department of Justice, Department of the Interior, Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Labor, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Transportation, Department of Energy, Department of Education, Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Homeland Security.

Grassley is a long-time advocate for whistleblowers.  He was the Senate author of the 1986 whistleblower updates to the federal False Claims Act.  Since 1986, these provisions have recovered more than $30 billion that otherwise would be lost to fraud.

The text of Grassley's letter follows here.  The text is the same for each of the 15 agencies.

 

May 10, 2013

VIA ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION

The Honorable Eric K. Shinseki

Secretary

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

810 Vermont Avenue NW

Washington, D.C. 20420

 

Dear Secretary Shinseki:

Time and again, whistleblowers courageously identify, often at great risk to their professional careers, waste, fraud, and abuse.  Unfortunately, as a result of their actions, whistleblowers often face intimidation, retaliation, and are subjected to prohibited personnel practices despite proscriptions against such action under federal law.[1]

As part of my efforts to protect whistleblowers, starting in 1988 I introduced an amendment known as the "anti-gag" provision to the Treasury, Postal Service and General Government Appropriations Act.[2] This provision was adopted and has been included in every appropriations bill signed into law since 1988,[3] most recently in March 2013 as part of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2013.[4] In addition the recently passed Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA) codified the anti-gag provision as a prohibited personnel practice and thereby eliminated the need for annual revision.[5]

The new federal law now requires every U.S. Government nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement to contain an explicit statement notifying employees that nondisclosure requirements do not supersede their rights and obligations created by existing statute or Executive Order relating to classified information, communications to Congress, reporting violations and/or misconduct to an Inspector General, or any other whistleblower protection.[6] Moreover, the law requires any agency using a nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement to also post the aforementioned statement on the agency website, as well as a specific list of controlling Executive orders and statutory provisions.[7]

As the author of this rider and an original cosponsor of the WPEA who worked closely in drafting this provision with Senator Akaka, I want to ensure that this law is fully implemented.  Accordingly, please provide the following information:

1)      All forms, policies, or agreements which mention communications with Congress used within the last five years, including those with either non-disclosure or non-disparagement provisions.

2)      All forms, policies, or agreements which include the statutorily-defined statement informing employees of their rights on every nondisclosure policy.

3)      All forms, policies, or agreements which purport to limit a current or former employee's ability to communicate directly with Congress, whether explicitly or as a part of a general prohibition without a specific Congressional exemption.

4)      A detailed statement of the various efforts that your department has taken to post the "anti-gag" provision on its website, along with a specific list of controlling Executive orders and statutory provisions.

Thank you in advance for ensuring your response arrives no later than May 24, 2013.  Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Chris Lucas of my Committee staff at (202) 224-5225.

Sincerely,

Charles E. Grassley

Ranking Member                               

Committee on the Judiciary

 

See 5 U.S.C. § 2302(a) (2006) (outlining prohibited personnel practices).

Treasury, Postal Service and General Government Appropriations Act, 1989, Pub. L. No. 100-440, 102 Stat. 1756 (1988).

See generally Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-74, 125 Stat. 932 (2011); Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-8, 123 Stat. 685 (2009).

Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013, Pub. L. No. 113-6, Div. F, Title I, Sec. 1105 (referencing back to Pub. L. No. 112-74, Div. C, Title VII, Sec. 715).

Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-199, 126 Stat. 1465 (2012).


[1] See 5 U.S.C. § 2302(a) (2006) (outlining prohibited personnel practices).

[2] Treasury, Postal Service and General Government Appropriations Act, 1989, Pub. L. No. 100-440, 102 Stat. 1756 (1988).

[3] See generally Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-74, 125 Stat. 932 (2011); Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-8, 123 Stat. 685 (2009).

[4] Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013, Pub. L. No. 113-6, Div. F, Title I, Sec. 1105 (referencing back to Pub. L. No. 112-74, Div. C, Title VII, Sec. 715).

[5] Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-199, 126 Stat. 1465 (2012).

[6] See id. § 104(b)(1).

[7] See id. § 115(a)(2).

Thursday, May 9, 2013

Senator Chuck Grassley released the following statement after the Chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee today released her "mark" that will be the baseline for debate when the committee begins consideration of the bill on Tuesday.  The bill includes payment limit reforms proposed by Grassley.  Click here for information about Grassley's payment limits reform package that he introduced in the Senate.  Click here for information about the support for Grassley's provisions during the budget debate.

"I appreciate Chairwoman Stabenow's continued commitment to farm program payments reform.  When two-thirds of the farm payments go to the wealthiest 10 percent of farmers and there are loopholes that allow farm payments to go to non-farmers, Americans lose confidence that we're using taxpayer money responsibly.  By including my reforms, Chairwoman Stabenow is putting forward a mark that is defensible and effective in this area.

"I was also pleased to see Congressman Fortenberry introduce companion legislation to my payment limits reform bill in the House today.  As the House Agriculture Committee considers a farm bill it would send a strong message if the House included the common sense and meaningful payment limit reforms in Congressman Fortenberry's bill and that Senator Stabenow has included in her mark."
Wednesday, May 8, 2013

Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa is looking into how hospitals are using a discount prescription drug program, known as 340B.  Certain hospitals appear to be making sizeable profits from the program at the expense of Medicare, Medicaid and private health insurance.  Grassley asked the federal agency in the charge of the program, the Health Resources and Services Administration, about its oversight of the program.  HRSA's response is available here.  Grassley's letter to HRSA is available here.  Grassley made the following comment on the response.

"The law requires HRSA to increase its guidance to participants in areas such as the definition of a patient. I intend to follow up with HRSA on the progress of those updates. Congress needs to know the extent to which the agency believes it lacks the statutory authority to ensure that hospitals use the 340B program to help the uninsured receive affordable prescription drugs.  Medicare and private insurance are paying much more for some drugs than the hospitals paid because of the program discount.  Congress needs a full picture of how hospitals are using the program and how their uses affect other programs in the health care system."

WASHINGTON - Senator Chuck Grassley is pressing the Secretary of Agriculture and the U.S. Trade Representative to engage U.S. trading partners in high-level discussions on breaking down barriers to biotechnology.  Grassley is the former Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over international trade policy.

"The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that as much as 90 percent of commodity crop acres utilize seeds improved through modern biotechnology.  Trade disruptions caused by barriers to biotechnology derived crops hurt both American farmers and the international customers they serve," the senators wrote to U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Acting U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis.

Grassley was joined by Senators Debbie Stabenow, the Chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, Michael Bennet of Colorado, Roy Blunt of Missouri, John Boozman of Arkansas, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, Chris Coons of Delaware, Dan Coats of Indiana, Thad Cochran of Mississippi, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Joe Donnelley of Indiana, Al Franken of Minnesota, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Johnny Isakson of Georgia, Mike Johanns of Nebraska, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Pat Roberts of Kansas, John Thune of South Dakota, and Mark Udall of Colorado.

A copy of the text of the letter is here.  A signed copy of the letter can be found by clicking here.

 

May 7, 2013

 

Secretary Thomas Vilsack

U.S. Department of Agriculture

1400 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20250

 

Ambassador Demetrios Marantis

Acting United States Trade Representative

600 17th Street NW

Washington, DC 20508

 

Dear Secretary Vilsack and Ambassador Marantis:

American agriculture has made significant advancements in the last 100 years. We have seen vast improvements in how farmers grow crops, raise livestock, manage risk, and conduct their operations. American farmers are constantly looking for new tools to maximize efficiencies and productivity.  Biotechnology has been one of these tools.  Biotechnology helps farmers better manage droughts, pests, and weeds with fewer resources.  Biotechnology provides a major boost to American farmers that face an increasingly competitive international market.  Biotechnology has also helped feed a growing world population with abundant, nutrient rich crops.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that as much as 90 percent of commodity crop acres utilize seeds improved through modern biotechnology. Trade disruptions caused by barriers to biotechnology derived crops hurt both American farmers and the international customers they serve. Regulatory asynchrony, zero tolerance policies, and re-registration requirements are among the most prevalent and costly regulatory hurdles.

We know and appreciate how both of you and your offices have given priority to these international regulatory challenges, and work extensively with our trading partners to find long term solutions.  For instance, USDA has been engaged in efforts to launch a pilot project with China which aims to address, bilaterally, some asynchrony issues.  We also understand that the U.S. government is engaging trading partners in multilateral efforts to discuss how to best address other critical issues, including unintended low-level presence.

Given the widespread adoption of biotechnology by American farmers, it is imperative you further raise the priority of these regulatory issues in discussions with our trading partners, emphasizing the importance of facilitating robust international trade.  We appreciate your attention to this important matter, and we look forward to working with you to address these important and complex issues.

Sincerely,
Monday, May 6, 2013

Senator Chuck Grassley issued this comment about his vote against the Marketplace Fairness Act, S.743, which would allow states to require online retailers to collect state sales tax.

"There are a lot of questions about how this legislation would work as a practical matter.  How would it be enforced, even on foreign-based businesses, and what kind of costs and administrative burdens it would put on all businesses?  Could businesses face audits from any state that acts on the authority given by the legislation?  What about the lack of certainty regarding how far the tax authority could be taken by states?  Would it result in states imposing taxes on financial transactions, for example?

"In addition, there's an unresolved Constitutional concern.  Congress has the authority to allow states to exercise authority across state lines under the commerce clause, but Congress does not have authority to loosen requirements under the due-process clause, which requires a minimum level of contacts between a state and a business before a state may exercise taxing authority over a business.  A single sale in a state isn't likely to meet that standard.

"These are important questions, and they should have been addressed in the Senate committee of jurisdiction, the Finance Committee.  Bringing this bill directly to the floor circumvented the committee process and the scrutiny and expertise needed for good tax policy."

 

Former State Ward Observes National Foster Care Month in May

She's Helping Launch a Program to Replace Trash Bags with New Duffel Bags

We have some positive changes to applaud as the nation observes National Foster Care Month in May, says former foster child Margaret Iuculano.

"In Ohio, $3 million from a mortgage settlement the state won will help foster kids pursue higher education and expand court-appointed advocates. And in Florida, a new law is going to make it much easier for foster kids to do normal things like sleepovers with their friends and school field trips," she says.

"In Nebraska, they're close to boosting the pay for foster parents, which will mean the state can retain and attract more and better foster parents."

But Iuculano, spokeswoman for Duffels for Kids (www.floridafapa.org/duffelsforkids), and founder of Angels for Foster Kids, says that sometimes, it's the smallest things foster children remember most.

"I was in foster care from age 11 to 16, when I aged out, and I was moved to 15 different homes in that time," she says. "Every time I moved, I had to pack my few belongings in a black trash bag.

"When you're already feeling abandoned, wondering whether anyone will ever want you or care about you, that trash bag seals it: No, they won't. You're a throwaway."

While workplace groups and communities have banded together and charities have sprung up across the country to address this problem, more foster care children than not continue to cart their belongings in trash bags.

"There just hasn't been enough," Iuculano says. "And often, the organizations gather used luggage. I know the intention is good, but we'd like to give these children something brand new; something all their own."

To that end, another positive to celebrate will be the first Duffels for Kids Walk, sponsored by the Florida State Foster/Adoptive Parent Association on May 18 in Miami.

It's the kickoff to the association's drive to provide new duffel bags to every child in that state's foster care system. As the program grows, its leaders hope to have new duffel bags for each child entering the system, Iuculano says.

Duffels for Kids will initially focus on Florida, but organizer LaShaun Wallace, who's on the board of the National Foster Parents Association, hopes it will eventually go nationwide.

It's in everyone's best interests to protect the most vulnerable in our society, children without the protection of loving, caring families, Iuculano says.

"When you look at the numbers, you quickly see why we desperately need more positive changes to applaud," she says.

These were compiled from various sources:

In recent years, there have been more than 500,000 children in foster care nationally; per one annual count, 22 percent were available for adoption.
In that year, 18 percent of children were adopted after waiting an average 42 months in foster care.
More than half of the children who age out of foster care will be unemployed adults.
Almost a third will be homeless.
One in five will be incarcerated within two years.

To support Duffels for Kids by attending the walk or making a donation, visit the website.

Some of the supporters scheduled to participate in the May 18 walk include Esther Jacobo, regional director for Miami-Dade and Monroe counties for the Florida Department of Children and Families and Children's Trust board member; Dr. Kalyani Gopal, licensed clinical psychologist and author of "Foster Parenting Step-by-Step," to be released in May, which tackles the day-to-day issues in raising foster children; and Sidarth Singh and Shifali Singh, siblings who founded the former Duffels for Angels - renamed Duffels for Kids -- and Aid for Change to provide duffel bags for foster children in Indiana.

About Duffels for Kids

Duffels for Kids is a new program coordinated by the Florida State Foster/Adoptive Parent Association, which will coordinate distribution of new duffel bags with the help of the Department of Children and Families, private investigators, guardian ad litems and local foster parent groups. Caregivers will be able to request a duffel bag for a child by calling the state foster parent associations 800 line or request an online form.

Tuesday, April 30, 2013

WASHINGTON - Senator Chuck Grassley has signed onto a letter urging the U.S. Trade Representative and the Acting Secretary of Commerce to consider initiating a challenge at the World Trade Organization regarding the recent decision by the European Commission to impose an anti-dumping duty on exports of ethanol from the United States.

"The administration ought to take a very aggressive position against this penalty because of the way it violates trade law standards and practices that are well established," Grassley said.  "What's happened is an unfair trade practice, and the negative impact on the U.S. renewable energy industry is already measurable."

The penalty is "unprecedented" with the Commission's "failure to make any particular finding of dumping by any producer or marketer investigated in connection with the case," wrote the bipartisan group of 15 senators led by Senators John Thune and Amy Klobuchar.  "We believe this rule sets dangerous precedent for trade and trade remedies in advance of the well-publicized state of important trade talks between the United States and the European Union, and will dramatically and unilaterally change the boundaries and limits of international dumping law," they wrote.

In addition to trade case precedent that has required findings of actual dumping, the senators' letter said there isn't an adequate finding by the European Commission that any injury was suffered in the European ethanol industry, noting it is another requirement of international anti-dumping trade law.

Certain member states of the European Union represent significant export markets for U.S. ethanol producers.  In 2012, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands represented the second and fourth largest importers of importers of U.S. ethanol.

-30-

Friday, April 26, 2013

WASHINGTON - In a weekly video address, Senator Chuck Grassley described his efforts to make sure immigration reform legislation avoids mistakes made in the 1986 legalization by making border security the top priority, giving American workers the first opportunity at jobs, holding employers accountable for their hiring practices, and leaving policy decisions in the representative branch of government.

Click here for the audio.

Here is the text of Grassley's address:

The Senate Judiciary Committee has held hearings during the last week on the immigration bill proposed by a bipartisan group of eight senators.

As the debate moves forward, I'm committed to making sure legislation doesn't repeat mistakes made in the legalization program that was part of the 1986 immigration overhaul.  Congress voted then to legalize the one million people who were in the country illegally with the assurance that doing so would fix the problem once and for all.  Decades later, there are 11 million people illegally in the country.  So, the legalization in 1986 didn't fix the problem.  Instead, it led to more illegality.

I'm working to make sure that unintended consequences are avoided in other areas of immigration reform, as well.  Congress should have learned with Obamacare that lawmakers need to legislate more and delegate less authority to the executive branch.  Even so, the proposed immigration bill contains waivers that would give unchecked power to the Secretary of Homeland Security to unravel any law that elected representatives of the people might pass.

Immigration policy also is a key component of America's national security apparatus, and every consideration should be given to how changes in the immigration system impact security of the homeland.  Securing the border needs to be the first priority.  Border security is fundamental to national sovereignty.  Any immigration reform must require accountability for border security.

We also need to fix the flaws in the current system in order to recognize the benefits of legal immigration - including the need for agricultural workers - while at the same time protecting the interests of U.S. citizens.  I'm also working to make sure American graduates and workers are given the first opportunity at jobs in science, technology, engineering and math here in this country, and that employers are held accountable for their hiring practices.

America's immigration system is broken.  Any repairs that are made and new policies pursued need to be both effective and respectful of the rule of law that safeguards the tremendous opportunities and freedoms found in America, a country based upon immigrants.

WASHINGTON, DC - In an effort to protect the investing public, improve the oversight of corporate auditing, and ensure that the financial reports of publicly traded companies are accurate and reliable, U.S. Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) reintroduced the PCAOB Enforcement Transparency Act of 2013.  The Reed-Grassley bill will make Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) disciplinary proceedings public to bring auditing deficiencies at the firms or the companies they audit to light in a timely manner and help deter violations.

The PCAOB was created in the wake of a series of corporate accounting scandals, such as Enron and WorldCom, that cost investors billions of dollars and hurt the U.S. economy.  Congress established the PCAOB to audit the auditors.  But the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley law creating the Board also required PCAOB's disciplinary proceedings to be kept confidential through charging, hearings, initial decision, and appeal.  Unfortunately, the secretive nature of the process enables firms that engage in misconduct to drag out the proceedings for years while the investing public is kept in the dark.

The Reed-Grassley bill will make PCAOB hearings and all related notices, orders, and motions, open and available to the public unless otherwise ordered by the Board.  The PCAOB procedure would then be similar to SEC Rules of Practice for similar matters, where hearings and related notices, orders, and motions are open and available to the public.

"The PCAOB is responsible for ensuring that auditors of public companies meet the highest standards of quality, independence, and ethics.  Reliable financial reporting is vital to the health of our economy and we must take the legislative steps necessary to enhance transparency in the PCAOB's enforcement process.  Currently, Congress, investors, and others are being denied critical information about an auditor's disciplinary process.  Investors and companies alike should be aware when the auditors and accountants they rely on have been charged or sanctioned for violating professional auditing standards," said Reed.

"Transparency brings accountability," Grassley said. "This legislation levels the playing field between auditors reviewed by the SEC and auditors reviewed by the PCAOB.  Currently, PCAOB proceedings are secret while SEC proceedings are not.  The secrecy provides incentives to bad actors to extend the proceedings as long as possible so they can continue to do business without notice to businesses about potential problems with a particular auditor.  This bill ends the secrecy and brings the kind of transparency that adds accountability to agency proceedings."

The PCAOB sets auditing standards for auditors of public companies, examines the quality of audits performed by public company auditors, and where necessary, imposes disciplinary sanctions on registered auditors and auditing firms.  The PCAOB oversees more than 2,400 auditing firms registered with the Board, as well as the thousands of audit partners and staff who contribute to a firm's work on each audit.

The lack of transparency surrounding disciplinary proceedings under current law can provide unscrupulous firms with an incentive to litigate cases in order to continue to shield conduct from the public.

For example, an accounting firm that was subject to a disciplinary proceeding issued no fewer than 29 additional audit reports on public companies during the course of the proceedings.  Those public companies and their investors were completely unaware there was a potential auditing problem with this accounting firm.   Before the firm was expelled from public company auditing, it issued those audit reports, knowing all the while that it was subject to disciplinary proceedings.  But investors were denied this information.

PCAOB's closed proceedings run counter to the public enforcement proceedings of other regulators, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the U.S. Department of Labor, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), and others.  Nearly all administrative proceedings brought by the SEC against public companies, brokers, dealers, investment advisers, and others are open, public proceedings.

 -end-

Prepared Floor Statement of Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa

Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee

On the Nomination of

Jane Kelly, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Mr. President,

I rise today in support of the nomination of Jane Kelly to be United States Circuit Judge for the Eight Circuit.

The nominee before us today, Ms. Kelly, presently serves as an assistant public defender in the Federal Public Defender's office for the Northern District of Iowa in the Cedar Rapids office.

She is well regarded in my home state of Iowa and so I'm pleased to support Senator Harkin's recommendation that he made to the President and subsequently the President's nomination of Ms. Kelly.

She received her B.A. summa cum laude from Duke University in 1987.    After spending a few months in New Zealand as a Fulbright Scholar, she went on to Harvard Law School.  She graduated cum laude, earning her J.D. degree in 1991.

Upon graduation, she served as a law clerk - first for Judge Donald J. Porter, United States District Court for the District of South Dakota, then for Judge David R. Hansen of the Eighth Circuit.

Judge Hansen has sent us a letter in support for Ms. Kelly.  He was a person that I have suggested to Republican Presidents for both district judge and then for his long tenure on the Eighth Circuit.  He has been a friend of mine as well.  This is what now-retired Judge Hansen said in support of Ms. Kelly.   "She is a forthright woman of high integrity and honest character" and that she has an "exceptionally keen intellect".  Judge Hansen concludes that "she will be a welcomed addition to the Court if confirmed."   I would add that I have no doubt that she will be confirmed.

Beginning in 1994, she has served as an assistant federal public defender in the Northern District of Iowa in the Cedar Rapids office. She handles criminal matters for indigent defendants and has been responsible for trying a wide range of crimes.  She became the supervising attorney for the Cedar Rapids office in 1999.

Ms. Kelly is active in the bar and in district court matters.  She presently serves on the Criminal Justice Act Panel Selection Committee, the blue-ribbon panel for criminal cases, and the Facilities Security Committee of the district court.

In 2004, her peers honored her with the John Adams Award from the Iowa Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and Drake University Law School.  She was unanimously chosen for this award, which recognizes individuals who show a commitment to the constitutional rights of criminal defense.

The American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary gave her a Unanimous "Qualified" rating.

I congratulate Ms. Kelly on her accomplishments and wish her well in her new duties.  I am pleased to support her confirmation and urge my colleagues to join me.

Now I would like to spend a couple minutes to update my colleagues on the progress we are making with respect to judicial nominations.

With this confirmation, the Senate will have confirmed 185 judicial nominations to the District and Circuit Courts.  Only two of President Obama's nominees failed confirmation.

That's a record of 185 to 2.

As I stated last week, a .989 batting average is a record any President would be thrilled with.  Yet this President, without justification, complains about obstruction and delay.

Today's confirmation is the 14th so far this year - including 5 circuit judges and 9 district judges.

Let me put that in perspective for my colleagues.  At this point in the second term of the Bush presidency, only one judicial nomination had been confirmed.   A comparative record of 14 - 1 is nothing to cry about.

As I said, this is the fifth nominee to be confirmed as a circuit judge this year, and the 35th overall.   Over 76 percent of his circuit nominees have been confirmed.  President Clinton ended up at 73 percent; President Bush at 71 percent.  So President Obama is doing better than the previous two Presidents.

So again, this President and Senate Democrats should have no complaints on the judicial confirmation process.  The fact of the matter is that President Obama is doing quite well.  I yield the floor.


Pages