On the recordOctober 23, 2001
Since the distinguished Senator from Nevada has said on more than one occasion that this is not about payback--I think that is a direct quotation, on several occasions--I wonder why, if the withholding of confirmations on judicial nominations is not about payback, that most of the argument that the Senator from Illinois and the Senator from Nevada keep making is how poorly they believe that President Clinton's nominees were treated by Republicans. What relevance would that have, if their action today isn't about payback?
Source
govinfo.gov




