STATES SENATE WHERE CONFIRMATIONS ARE HELD UP NOT BECAUSE
           SOMEBODY VOTES DOWN A NOMINEE, BUT BECAUSE THEY CAN'T EVER GET
           A VOTE. AND GOVERNOR BUSH -- AND I BELIEVE I'M QUOTING HIM
           CORRECTLY -- SAID IF YOU'VE GOT THE NOMINEE, HOLD YOUR HEARING
           AND THEN WITHIN 60 DAYS DAYS, VOTE THEM UP OR VOTE THEM DOWN.

           DON'T LEAVE THEM IN LIMBO. FRANKLY, MR. PRESIDENT, THAT'S WHAT
           WE'RE PAID TO DO IN THIS BODY. WE'RE PAID TO VOTE EITHER "YES"
           OR "NO," NOT VOTE "MAYBE." AND WHEN WE HOLD A NOMINEE UP NOT
           ALLOWING THEM A VOTE, NOT TAKING ANY ACTION ONE WAY OR THE
           OTHER, WE'RE NOT ONLY VOTING "MAYBE," BUT WE'RE DOING A
           TERRIBLE DISSERVICE TO THE MAN OR WOMAN WE DO THIS TO. THEY
           HAVE TO PUT THEIR LIFE ON HOLD. THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO
           HAPPEN. ARE THEY GOING TO BE CONFIRMED OR NOT GOING TO BE

           CONFIRMED. IT'S NOT LIKE WHEN ANY ONE OF US RUN FOR ELECTION.
           WE KNOW THAT ON A CERTAIN DAY, THE ELECTION OCCURS. AND WE
           EITHER WIN OR WE LOSE. BUT WE KNOW THAT ON THAT TUESDAY -- IT'S
           USUALLY A TUESDAY -- WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO KNOW OUR FATE. WE
           WON OR WE LOST. THESE PEOPLE COME HERE AND THEY NEVER KNOW
           WHEN. THEY DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A HEARING.
           AND IF THEY HAVE A HEARING, THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW WHETHER THERE
           WILL BE A VOTE IN COMMITTEE. IF THERE'S A VOTE IN COMMITTEE,
           THEY DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY'LL EVER COME ON THE FLOOR. AND IF
           THEY COME ON THE FLOOR, THEY DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY'LL EVER

           HAVE A VOTE, BECAUSE ONE PERSON MYSTERIOUSLY HIDING OUT IN THE
           CLOAKROOM MAY SAY, DON'T ALLOW THEM TO COME TO A VOTE YET SO.
           THEY MAY HAVE 99 SENATORS WHO WOULD VOTE FOR THEM BUT SOMEBODY
           MYSTERIOUSLY IN THE BACKGROUND SAYS DON'T VOTE, AND THEY DON'T
           VOTE. AND LET ME TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENED. WE HAVE HELENE WHITE
           FOR THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. SHE'S BEEN
           PENDING FOR 1,360 DAYS. GOVERNOR BUSH, THE LEADER OF THE
           REPUBLICAN PARTY, SAID YOU OUGHT TO HAVE A VOTE UP OR DOWN

           WITHIN 60 DAYS. LET'S HAVE A VOTE ON HELENE WHITE. SHE'S BEEN
           WAITING NOT 60 DAYS, NOT 600 DAYS BUT 1,360 DAYS. KATHLEEN
           MCCREE-LEWIS, WHO HAS BEEN NOMINATED FOR THE U.S. COURT OF
           APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, AN OUT STAND GS AFRICAN-AMERICAN
           WOMAN -- AN OUTSTANDING AFRICAN-AMERICAN WOMAN, WHO'S HAD ONE
           OF THE HIGHEST RATINGS OF ANYONE WE'VE EVER SEEN COME BEFORE
           THE SENATE. SHE HAS BEEN WAITING FOR 370 DAYS. NOT THE 60 DAYS

           TALKED ABOUT BUT MORE THAN SIX TIMES THE 60 DAYS. BONNIE
           CAMPBELL FOR THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
           THAT'S BEEN PENDING FOR MORE THAN 215 DAYS. WE'RE HAVING A
           DEBATE NOW WHERE WE BRING UP THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN'S ACT
           THAT'S BEEN STALLED HERE, EVEN THOUGH THE VIOLENCE AGAINST
           WOMEN'S ACT THAT HAS EXPIRED. DISTINGUISHED SENATORS ON BOTH
           SIDES OF THE AISLE HAVE -- ARE WORKING TO BRING IT UP. WE CAN'T
           BRING IT UP FOR A VOTE. I SEE THE DISTINGUISHED SENATOR FROM

           DELAWARE AND THE DISTINGUISHED SENATOR FROM KANSAS, BOTH WHOM
           SUPPORT IT, ON THE FLOOR. WE CAN'T GET THAT UP FOR A VOTE. WE
           ALSO CAN'T GET BONNIE CAMPBELL UP, EVEN THOUGH SHE IS ASSISTANT
           ATTORNEY GENERAL, SUPPORTED AND WORKED FOR AND ADMINISTERED THE
           VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT, AN ACT THAT HAS SEEN A DRAMATIC
           DECREASE UNTIL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN. WE OUGHT TO BE STANDING

           AND APPLAUDING AND SAYING, SOMEBODY WHO WOULD SHOW BY THEIR OWN
           EXPERIENCE THAT THEY CAN DO THE THINGS NECESSARY TO BRING DOWN
           THIS SCOURGE OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEN WHEN THEY'VE
           GONE THROUGH ALL THE BETTING PROCESS AND THEY FIND OUT THEY'RE
           ONE OF THE MOST QUALIFIED PEOPLE TO BE A JUDGE IF ANYBODY'S
           BEEN CONFIRMED HERE IN THE LAST 20 YEARS, REPUBLICAN OR
           DEMOCRAT, WE OUGHT TO AT LEAST LET HER HAVE A VOTE INSTEAD OF
           MAKING HER -- HOLDING HER IN LIMBO. HELENA KAEGAN FOR THE U.S.
           COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. SHE'S BEEN

           PENDING FOR MORE THAN 480 DAYS WITHOUT A VOTE. LYNETTE NORTON,
           FOR THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
           PENNSYLVANIA. SHE HAS BEEN PENDING FOR MORE THAN 890 DAYS.
           PATRICIA COHEN OF THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
           COLORADO. SHE'S BEEN PENDING FOR MORE THAN 500 DAYS. DOLLY GEE,
           THE U.S. COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. SHE'S
           BEEN PENDING FOR MORE THAN 495 DAYS. LET THEM HAVE A VOTE. LET
           THEM HAVE A VOTE. RHONDA C. FIELDS FOR THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT

           FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. SHE'S BEEN PENDING MORE THAN 325
           DAYS. LINDA REGAL, U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
           NEVADA. SHE'S BEEN PENDING FOR -- MORE THAN 165 DAYS. LET THEM
           HAVE A VOTE. THESE WOMEN ARE OUTSTANDING. THEY HAVE
           DEMONSTRATED MORE THAN MOST PEOPLE WHO GET CONFIRMED IN THIS
           BODY, REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT, THEY HAVE DEMONSTRATED HOW

           WELL-QUALIFIED THEY ARE. AT LEAST LET THEM HAVE A VOTE. AND IF
           PEOPLE WANT TO VOTE AGAINST THEM, VOTE AGAINST THEM. I'LL STATE
           FOR THE RECORD, I WILL VOTE FOR EVERY ONE OF THEM. AND IN MY
           CHECK ON OUR SIDE OF THE AISLE, EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT SENATOR
           WILL VOTE FOR EVERY ONE OF THESE WOMEN. PRESIDENT CLINTON, IN
           REMARKS BEFORE THE MICHIGAN BAR ASSOCIATION, RECENTLY SPOKE
           ABOUT THE SENATE'S FAILURE TO ACT ABOUT HIS JUDICIAL NOMINEE
           NOMINEES, NEEGT HIS NOMINEES HAVE RECEIVED MORE TOP AMERICAN
           BAR ASSOCIATION RATINGS THAN THOSE -- NOTING THAT HIS NOMINEES

           HAVE RECEIVED MORE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION TOP RATINGS THAN
           THOSE THAN IN 30 YEARS. LET ME STRESS THIS. PRESIDENT CLINTON,
           TO HIS CREDIT, HAS NOMINATED PEOPLE WHO HAVE RECEIVED HIGHER
           RATINGS THAN ANY PRESIDENT, DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN, IN 40 YEARS
           AND THEY STILL GET HELD UP. HE SAID -- QUOTE -- "THESE PEOPLE
           ARE HIGHLY QUALIFIED, WHICH LEADS TO ONLY ONE CONCLUSION, THAT
           THE APPOINTMENTS PROCESS HAS BEEN POLITICIZED IN THE HOPE OF
           GETTING APPOINTEES ULTIMATELY TO THE BENCH WHO WILL BE MORE

           POLITICAL. THAT IS WRONG. IT IS A DENIAL OF JUSTICE." PRESIDENT
           CLINTON IS RIGHT. WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE NOMINEES.
           LET THEM HAVE A VOTE. DON'T DO THIS IN THE DARK OF THE NIGHT
           HOLDING PEOPLE UP. NOW, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FOUR NOMINEES,
           THREE FROM ARIZONA, WHICH HAS A DESPERATE SITUATION WHERE THEY
           NEED FEDERAL JUDGES. WHEREAS MY FRIEND FROM ARIZONA, SENATOR

           KYL, HAS POINTED OUT QUITE RIGHTLY, CASES CANNOT ARE HEARD,
           CIVIL CASES CANNOT BE HEARD. AND HE'S HAD EXPERIENCES AS A
           CIVIL LAWYER. HE KNOWS HOW DIFFICULT THAT IS. BUT ALSO I WOULD
           SAY AS A FORMER PROSECUTOR, I KNOW THAT WHAT HAPPENS, THE
           CRIMINAL CASES CAN'T BE HEARD EITHER BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE
           ENOUGH PEOPLE ON THE BENCH. AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS, THE
           PROSECUTOR'S GOT TO STOP PLEA BARGAINING DOWN. HE'S GOT TO
           EITHER GET LIGHTER SENTENCES OR HE'S GOT TO TRY TO DROP -- HE
           OR SHE HAS GOT TO START DROPPING CHARGES ALL OVER THE PLACE

           BECAUSE THE -- THEY KNOW THEY CAN'T GET A TRIAL, THE JUDGES
           AREN'T THERE. THEY'RE GOING TO BE TOUGH ON LAW AND ORDER, THAT
           MEANS WE'VE ALSO GOT TO HAVE THE JUDGES THERE. THEY CAN'T JUST
           SAY WE'RE AGAINST CRIME. I'M WILLING TO CONCEDE THAT ALL 100 OF
           US ARE AGAINST CRIME. BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO FIGHT CRIME, WE'VE
           GOT TO HAVE THE MEN AND WOMEN THERE TO DO IT, THE PROSECUTORS,
           THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS, THE JUDGES, THE COURTS. NOW, WE WILL
           MOVE THOSE JUDGES THROUGH. I WILL VOTE FOR EVERY ONE OF THEM.

           BUT I'D ALSO POINT OUT, THEY MOVED THROUGH RE, VERY RAPIDLY OF
           THESE JUDGES FROM THE TIME THEY WERE NO, MA'AM NIGHT TO THE
           HEARINGS TO THE FLOOR -- THEY WERE NOMINATED TO THE HEARINGS TO
           THE FLOOR. A LOT OF THE OTHER NOMINEES THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING
           TODAY, THE JUDICIAL NOMINEES, HAVE WAITED AND WAITED AND WAITED
           AND WAITED AND CANNOT GET A VOTE. IN NOW, IN OUR LAST EXECUTIVE
           BUSINESS SESSION, MY FRIEND FROM UTAH, THE DISTINGUISHED
           CHAIRMAN OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, SAID THERE IS AND HAS BEEN
           NO JUDICIAL VACANCY CRISIS. IT'S A BOLD STATEMENT. IT'S -- I

           WOULD SAY THERE ARE 67 CURRENT VACANCIES IN COURTS IN EMERGENCY
           SITUATIONS, INCLUDING THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, AND, IF WE PASS THE
           JUDGE BILL THAT HAS BEEN REQUESTED BY THE NONPARTISAN JUDICIAL
           CONFERENCE CONFERENCE, WE'D HAVE ANOTHER 70 OR MORE JUDICIAL
           VACANCIES, SO WE'D HAVE OVER 150 JUDICIAL VACANCIES. THE
           CHAIRMAN WENT ON TO SAY, AND ACCURATELY, THAT SINCE 363 JUDGES
           ARE NOW SERVING -- HE SAID THEY ARE NOW SERVING IN THE FEDERAL
           JUDICIARY. THAT IS ACCURATE. 363 SENIOR JUDGES ARE SERVING

           THERE. BUT IT IS NOT ACCURATE TO SAY THEN THE TRUE NUMBER OF
           VACANCIES IS LESS THAN ZERO. I COMMEND THE SENIOR JUDGES COMING
           IN. SOME WELL INTO THEIR 80'S WHO ARE THERE TO FILL IN. BUT
           THAT'S NOT THE WAY IT SHOULD BE. LITIGANTS HAVE NO IDEA WHETHER
           A MUCH OLDER JUDGE WILL BE ABLE TO COME IN FOR TWO DAYS TO HEAR
           A CASE OR NOT. THEY DON'T KNOW WHO ARE GOING TO BE THE JUDGES.
           THEY CAN'T LOOK AT A COURT AND SAY, YEAH, THESE ARE THE ONES,
           THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE THE JUDGES. THEY DON'T KNOW.

           DIDN'T HAVE THESE SENIOR JUDGES. OF COURSE, THE COURTS WOULD
           COLLAPSE UNDER THE WEIGHT OF THEIR OWN CASELOAD. BUT LET'S --
           LET'S NOT SAY THE ONLY WAY THAT CAN HAPPEN, IF PEOPLE NO MATTER
           HOW OLD THEY ARE SAY, WELL, I'LL NEVER RETIRE. I'LL JUST KEEP
           ON SHOWING UP AND DO THE BEST I CAN. WE ALSO KNOW THE LIFEBLOOD
           OF OUR JUDICIARY IS TO HAVE NEW JUDGES COME IN. AND I REGRET
           AND THE REASON I MENTION THIS, IS THE LAST CONFIRMATION HEARING

           FOR FEDERAL JUDGES IS HELD BY THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WAS IN
           JULY JULY. IN FACT, IT WAS THE LAST TIME THE JUDICIARY
           COMMITTEE REPORTED ANY NOMINEES TO THE FULL SENATE IN JULY.
           THROUGHOUT AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER, NOW IN THE FIRST WEEK IN
           OCTOBER, THERE HAVE BEEN NO ADDITIONAL HEARINGS HELD OR EVEN
           NOTICED, NO EXECUTIVE BUSINESS MEETINGS INCLUDING ANY JUDICIAL
           NOMINEES ON THE AGENDA. NOW, I MENTION THAT BECAUSE IN 1992,
           THAT WAS THE LAST YEAR OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. WE HAD A
           REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT AND A DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY IN THE SENATE.

           WE HELD THREE CONFIRMATION HEARINGS IN AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER. WE
           CONTINUED TO WORK TO CONFIRM JUDGES. AND HOW LATE DID WE WORK?
           EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE THE SO-CALLED THURMOND RULE WHICH CUTS OFF
           JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS AFTER ABOUT MIDYEAR, YOU KNOW HOW LONG THE
           DEMOCRATIC SENATE SENATE, A DEMOCRATIC-CONTROLLED SENATE WAS
           CONFIRMING JUDGES FOR A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT?
           UP TO AND INCLUDING THE VERY LAST DAY OF THE SESSION. UP UNTIL

           AND INCLUDING SIX MONTHS BEFORE THE SESSION ENDED. I KNOW THAT
           THERE'S SOME FRUSTRATION HERE. SOME SENATORS HAVE OBJECTED TO
           SENATE COMMITTEES CONTINUING TO MEET ON OTHER MATTERS WHILE THE
           SENATE'S IN SESSION. WELL, PARTLY BECAUSE THE MATTER IS SO
           ACUTE WITH REGARD TO NUMEROUS VACANCIES ON OUR COURT OF
           APPEALS. AND THE QUALIFIED WOMEN AND MEN WHO HAVE BEEN
           NOMINATED AND STALLED. THE CHAIRMAN SAYS -- AND HE HOLDS THE
           BANNER FOR HIS PARTY -- HE SAYS NO DEMOCRATS HAVE GROUNDS TO

           COMPLAIN. WELL, I REMIND THE SENATE OF THE HOOPS THAT RICHARD
           PIAZ -- RICHARD PAEZ AND MARCIA BERZON HAD TO JUMP THROUGH IN
           ORDER TO GET A VOTE, INCLUDING THE EXTRAORDINARY STEP OF OVER
           OVERCOMING THE MOTION OF POSTPONING INDEFINITELY THE VOTE ON
           MARCIA BERZON. SO I HOPE WE WILL CONTINUE TO MEET OUR
           RESPONSIBILITY TO ALL
           
           NOMINEES: MEN, WOMEN, MINORITIES, ALL NOMINATIONS. AS LONG AS
           THE SENATE'S IN SESSION, I'M GOING TO URGE ACTION.

           HIGHLY-QUALIFIED NOMINEES SHOULD NOT BE DELAYED. THE SENATE
           SHOULD JOIN WITH THE PRESIDENT TO CONFIRM WELL-QUALIFIED AND
           DIVERSE AND FAIR-MINDED NOMINEES TO FULFILL THE NEEDS OF THE
           FEDERAL COURTS AROUND THE COUNTRY. I SEE MY FRIEND FROM ARIZONA
           ON THE FLOOR. I'VE SPOKEN SOMEWHAT LONGER THAN I SUGGESTED TO
           HIM THAT I WOULD, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT THAT. BUT I HOPE
           HE'LL TAKE SOME COMFORT IN THE FACT THAT I STARTED AT THE
           BEGINNING OF MY -- I STATED AT THE BEGINNING OF MY TALK, BOTH
           THIS AFTERNOON AND THIS MORNING SAYING THAT I WOULD VOTE FOR

           THE NOMINEES FROM HIS STATE, INCLUDING ONE I KNOW HAS BEEN A
           LONGTIME FRIEND OF HIS. AND I'M GOING TO BE URGING MEMBERS ON
           THIS SIDE TO. AND I CAN SAY WITH SOME CERTITUDE, ALL FOUR WILL
           BE CONFIRMED. MR. PRESIDENT, I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME
           AND YIELD THE FLOOR.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM ARIZONA.
           

           MR. KYL: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. MR. PRESIDENT, I APPRECIATE
           THOSE REMARKS OF THE DISTINGUISHED RANKING MEMBER OF THE
           JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND IT'S PROBABLY A GOOD SEGUE FOR ME TO
           TRY TO EXPLAIN WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON HERE, BECAUSE COLLEAGUES
           THAT MAY BE WATCHING OR PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT IN THE SENATE MAY BE
           WONDERING WHAT ALL OF THE DISCUSSION HAS BEEN ABOUT WHEN THERE
           ARE FOUR SPECIFIC NOMINEES WHO PRESIDENT CLINTON HAS NOMINATED
           FOR FEDERAL DISTRICT JUDGESHIPS AND THEY ARE OSTENSIBLY BEING

           CONSIDERED BY THE SENATE. BUT I'VE HEARD NO DISCUSSION ABOUT
           THE FOUR. SO I'M GOING TO DISCUSS THE FOUR VERY BRIEFLY. THE
           PROBLEM, AS YOU'VE HEARD, IS THAT MANY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE
           AISLE ARE UNHAPPY WITH THE FACT THAT OTHER NOMINEES HAVE NOT
           BEEN CONSIDERED THIS YEAR. AND YOU'VE HEARD ALL OF THE
           DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. YOU'VE HEARD SENATOR HATCH ON OUR SIDE
           EXPLAIN WHY THAT IS SO SO. BUT THERE HAS BEEN GREAT DISPLEASURE
           ON THE OTHER SIDE BECAUSE, IN THEIR VIEW, NOT ALL OF THE
           NOMINEES THAT THEY WOULD HAVE LIKE TO HAVE HAD CONSIDERED WERE.

           THE FOUR NOMINEES WHO ARE BEFORE US TODAY ARE THE ONLY FOUR
           THAT THE SENATE CAN CONSIDER. THEY ARE THE ONLY NOMINEES THAT
           HAVE GONE ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE PROCESS FROM NOMINATIONS,
           A.B.A. CLEARANCE,
{END: 2000/10/03 TIME: 14-45 , Tue.  106TH SENATE, SECOND SESSION}