On the recordNovember 7, 2003
the point is if there needs to be a discussion on judges, we don't have to wait until Wednesday at 6 o'clock. We can start talking right now on this legislation because judges have to enforce the law. It is a law we are talking about. They have to do it on a trial level and they have to do it on an appellate level. We have given this President 98 percent of the judges he wants--98 percent of the judges he wants. People talk about the Constitution. We can talk about the Constitution also. The majority makes these statements that a filibuster is a brand new thing; it has never happened with judges; isn't it a terrible thing this is happening in the Senate. Of course, it is without foundation. There is no truth to it. Filibusters have taken place on previous occasions, and it will take place again long after we are gone. To think we have to wait until Wednesday to talk about judges--we don't have to wait until Wednesday. We can talk now. This is a complicated piece of legislation. Don't you think we are going to need judges to interpret the law? Of course we are. The record we have is pretty good. Do you think the advise-and-consent clause of the Constitution meant every judge the President suggested to us we just approve them? Would the President be happy if we had 100 percent of his judges? How about 99 percent or 99.5 percent? Ninety-eight percent isn't good enough.
Source
govinfo.gov




