On the recordSeptember 13, 2016
Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I objected to the confirmation of these judges before, and the reason still stands. There is little evidence that the Court of Federal Claims needs them. According to the latest public statistics, the court's caseload is down 49 percent from 2011 and 66 percent if we go back to 2007. I understand that some say these numbers are skewed by a flood of relatively simple cases related to vaccine claims that has begun to ebb in recent years, but even if we remove those vaccine claims from the statistics, the court's caseload has still dropped. The number of nonvaccine cases dropped from 1,427 in 2014 to 1,404 in 2015. That latest number is 10 percent lower than in 2013, 25 percent lower than it was in 2008, and 39 percent lower than it was in 2007. I respectfully remind my colleagues that the 16 active judges authorized in the statute for the Court of Federal Claims is not a minimum number, it is a maximum number. That number was set in 1982--an increase from the six judges that were previously authorized. Perhaps it is time to revisit that number again 34 years later. I would also note that an auxiliary of senior nonactive judges is available to the court to hear cases. These senior judges receive a full salary whether or not they hear cases on the condition that they be available to work when called.…





