On the recordDecember 5, 1997
I'll answer this, but let me answer this one first. What I would like to say today, and all I am going to say today, is Bill Lann Lee's personal story, his work experience, his integrity, and his fitness for this job are absolutely beyond question. He should not be denied the job because he disagrees with the Republicans in the Senate on whether affirmative action is or is not good policy. The only thing he's required to do is to enforce the law as the Supreme Court hands it down or as the Congress passes it, and to recuse in the case of any kind of personal conflict, which he said he would do in the case of the California law, which is now moot. So I believe--I will say again--he is entitled to a vote. The Senators ought to vote on him. No one has put forward a credible reason for why this man should not be appointed. Surely the fact that he agrees with the President who wishes to appoint him on the question of what kind of affirmative action programs we should or shouldn't have, surely that should not disqualify him for this position. That is the point I have made. I still think that he ought to be able to serve. Yes, now go ahead. Asian Economies
Source
govinfo.gov




