Arlen Specter: “the issue now pending exists on complexity on a number of levels. I agree with the remarks just made by our…”

“the issue now pending exists on complexity on a number of levels. I agree with the remarks just made by our distinguished majority leader that the American people ought not to pay for union elections. It is an open question as to how the consent decree was entered into when it was, and why the U.S. Government entered into that consent decree. But that is what we face at the present time. My view is that we have a question of judicial authority here which is paramount, and it is a matter for the court to decide under our doctrine of separation of powers. We are very premature in what we are doing here on two scores. One is there has been a recommendation for a new election, which, as I understand the record, has not yet been approved in the court. This is a complicated matter. There are lots of complexities on it. But my understanding is that it has not been approved by the court. And then the court under any expected interpretation would come to the conclusion that this is a new election, and not to be paid by the Treasury of the United States under the preexisting arrangement. That election has already been paid for. But essentially this a matter for the court to decide. And there would be ample time for the Congress to turn down an appropriation in the future on the basis that is not an appropriate matter to be paid for by taxpayers' money. But on this state of the record, it is my view that it is a judicial matter, and not a matter of the Congress.”