On the recordApril 29, 2010
Of those, if I may ask another question, who have been cleared, some have been allowed to come forward for votes on the Senate floor. The last was Judge Chin who had been held for a considerable period of time. We actually, if I recall correctly, had to file cloture and take more time. There is a process built around cloture so it burns up Senate floor time. We were forced to do that. When the nomination was finally voted on in the Senate, is my recollection correct that he cleared the Senate 98 to 0? Mrs. McCASKILL. He was held for a long time. And, yes, the Senator is correct, we had to go through all the procedural hoops that take time. Time is money when you are working for the taxpayers. Every hour we spend on something is an hour we cannot spend on something else. Everyone--all the good people who are working in this room, in the cloakrooms, and in all the offices--is paid by the taxpayers. We took time to go through cloture. Then there was not one ``no'' vote. If that is not a great example of obstructionism for the sake of obstructing, I cannot think of a better one--forcing the Senate to take days to confirm unanimously a nominee after they have held for a long period of time.
