Hearing will come to order. Today the country on the rules and administration will receive testimony on the Senate Resolution 355, improving procedures about the consideration and combinations in the u. S. Senate. I want to thank the senator whos here with us at the table. In 2010 the committee undertook a defensiv complete examinatione filibuster in the United States senate. Of the senate did take steps in early 2013 to modify some of the rules and procedures for the considering bills, conference record since the denominations during that congress. Later that same year the senate took a more aggressive step in the Nuclear Options for nominations. A expired the deal a of the 113h congress and today we will revisit one aspect of the temporary changes limiting the postcloture debate time of certain nominations and consider whether to restore it permanently as it is provided in the resolution. Like the change enacted in 2013, this resolution proposes to reduce the rent window for the post cloture consideration depending on the type of nominee. The resolution also preserves the full amount of the wing for the resolution. The full amount of the postcloture nominations to the highest levels of the executive branch, the Circuit Courts and Supreme Court just like the predecessor. In short it is designed to return the senate to the time that it effectively and efficiently fulfilled its constitutional duty to confirm appointments necessary to the daytoday function of the government. The postcloture debate time provided will allow the senate to deliberate the debate and vote in a timely way. As this was evidenced in the 113th congress, the change doesnt inhibit members from debating were deliberating on the qualifications of nominees. It shortens what is currently an unreasonably long process. Admittedly, i didnt support the change in the 113th congress. I was concerned when the senate altered the rules, there would be no turning back. Im worried that the changes proposed at the time limit each senators voice and power. But ive witnessed something different. The nominees whether i supported or opposed them were debated on and voted on in a timely and practical manner. More importantly the senate no longer wasted in words waiting now to hear about the virtues of the vices of the surgeon nominees, not to debate their efficiencies or discuss whether they were fit or unfit, just waiting for the 30 of postcloture debate to expire. In 2013 the senate was able to carry out its constitutional duties and weve witnessed a timely executive branch. To allow the senate to stop waiting and start acting. That is exactly what we need today. The American People are frustrated i and washington gridlock and believe we cant even get the simplest of things done. We need to fix this interface with the process to what it once was and i believe that this is an opportunity and i look over to testimony today into the debate to follow in support of the resolution. Thank you very much mr. Chairman and to all of the members that are here and to senator langford for appearing before a us and i want to thank him for his heartfelt desire to make thimake the senate work bed also the two of my colleagues that are here and that is senator udall is a member of the committee that has long worked on this issue as well as senator merkley who is a visiting her today and thank him for his work. And a few others of us have worked on this issue. Athe first bill we introduced in the class in 2006 was devoted to something related to this that made some significant changes to the rules and then we went on to support in 2010 and the kennedy and members of the committee are looking at changes to the policies that are in place in the senate and just recently the chair and help we passed a rule change that requires mandatory harassment training. As youll see from my remarks, i just feel that this is not the right moment to make the changes to the rule and i will explain. Many people refer to the senate as the worlds greatest deliberative body because of the senate as an Institution Designed for the careful consideration and debate of the proposed and nominations. How we deliver aid is governed by the senate rules. Im looking back at senator alexander whos been an expert on this that happened back in 1986 when we went from 100 hours of postcloture debate time to the current rule of 30 hours. The resolution we are considering today asks us to make a second permanent change. As senator langford notes in his testimony, following the years to get the nominees confirmed the senate voted 7816 to temporarily change the rules on the postcloture debate time in 2013. But it is important to note that back in 2013, the circumstances were very different than they are today. It required a 60 vote threshold back then and it was respect than a third of process to respect qualified judicial nominees was in place. It remained unfilled even though the qualified nominees were waiting at the front. A bipartisan supermajority of the senate supported a temporary change to the rule. First the nominees are getting confirmed and on thursday just this last thursday that leader highlighted the fact that i quote the Senate Republicans are closing in on record for the most Circuit Court appointments in the president s first year in Office Without objection i ask that this be entered into the hearing record. It reads judicial appointments are thus deeper story that matters. Circuit courts in the first year in the white house. President trump has successfully appointed the Circuit Court judges more than any president in office since the federal Appellate Courts were established 126 years ago. In addition to this committee i also serve on the Judiciary Committee which ive seen firsthand the process and the pace at which the nominees are being processed. President trump will have 19 judges confirmed in his presidency compared to 13 for president obama in the same time period and in the Judiciary Committee we have reported 44 judicial nominations to the floor already this year but he reported only 23 nominees on the committee. They reported 32 nominees in the first year of president bushs term in 28 i and 28 in the firsf president clinton compared to the 44 that we have seen this year. It is also instructive to look at the end of president obamas term, which is 22 judicial nominees that were confirmed in the first two years in office. That is the view in congress. Truman was president. When you look at the facts, it is clear as my republican colleagues have acknowledged the Current Congress is on track for a recordbreaking year of advancing the nominees and it is unnecessary at this moment to change the rules in the senate and i told senator langford this is something we can consider before the new president comes into office but now when the nominees are coming through the process with many in a purely partisan manner, the change would only add to the partisan atmosphere. The danger involved in reducing the debate time to expedite the confirmation of the nominees we are considering was also highlighted by the Louisiana Republican senator last week during a Judiciary Committee hearing. I was at the hearing and many people have seen the video of senator kennedy asking matthew pearson, the nominee to be the District Court judge basic legal questions. He was unable to answer any of them. Yesterday he withdrew his nomination. Last week the administration also withdrew the nominations of jeff and greg has chairman grassleys urging. They are three of the 18 that have been withdrawn this year and they are after the Committee Process. These and others demonstrate the importance of careful consideration of nominees for executive branch positions and Lifetime Appointments to the then check and i would also note the American Bar Association has rated for the nominees and 45 to Trump Administration not qualified including the two that received rating unanimously. That is fairly unprecedented given the fact before this year they issued the rating twice since 1989 and we have seen two more of them already this year. The American People deserve qualified judges who will interpret the law fairly and the best way to get the judges that are faicharges thatare fair ando have a solid evaluation and confirmation process where the branches collaborating in the senate and we have ample time to review and debate the nominees. At the time but have seen unprecedented challenges to the judiciary and the rule of law we need appropriate checks to ensure the selection of qualified nominees to growth the executive and Judicial Branch now more than ever. Before we turn to senator langford i would like to note im glad we are having a hearing in this committee and i hope we will have more next year and i also appreciate the senators work with me on this date election infrastructure issue, something that is an Exciting Development and will be a great topic for a hearing. Just thought i would put in a plug. Thank you. Your written testimony will be made part of the testimony as you know. Please proceed as you wish. Friends and colleagues, i anticipate this to be a dialogue. I dont think a single one of us thinks that things are going swimmingly. We are not engaging on the issues. We do consume a tremendous amount of time no brought in 30 hours of debate in the silence on the senate floor with occasionally someone to step up and speak on something unrelated to the 30 hours of debate for the nominee. This isnt so much a debate about if only we had 30 hours of debate we would get so many facts out because we are really not debating individuals. The work is done in the committees and back and forth with the administration. The challenges we have learned as a body that we are now either going to do nominees were legislation, but we cant do both because its the calendar is full for the week on three nominations, youll never get to any legislation. We continue to have the constituents come to us and say when is the senat miss the senao vote on things that we dont have time for the nominations and legislation. This continues to accelerate. The issue we will continue to face is the gridlock on capitol hill is spreading across the rest of washington and the more that you have nominees that are not confirmed in every agency, all of us and our constituent services folks and legislative staff will tell us they are calling over to the agencies and they are saying we cant give you an answer there isnt a Senate Confirmed person there. As it spreads it affects all of the constituent services and a free permit at the request and every bit the process that happens. The gridlock that is here is moving over there. But that doesnt help us longterm. Ive tried to get some basic examples of this in history as we deal with the postcloture debate just on the nominations. Starting in 1949, from 1949 to 1992, there were 12 cloture votes for the nominations during the entire time period than startinthenstarting in 93 averd three cloture votes for nominations and in the 109th session the average jumped to nine cloture votes for nominations for a year. Then from 2009 to 2012 it jumped again to 13. In 2013 the beginning of president obama second term, the senate determined something had to be done about the nominations so the Senate Passed 15 by the vote of 78 to 16 Standing Order just for the one session to reduce postcloture debate time for most nominees from 30 hours to eight hours and reduced up to two hours per District Court nominees. Under Standing Order the Supreme Court cabinet nominations allstate 30 hours. Standing order in 2013 was an attempt to avoid the Nuclear Option as we now know from history that did occur it was still invoked in november of the same year. The original Standing Order remained in functioned through the rest of 2014 and we saw the operation of it. In 2013 the Senate Considered intolerable the senate 13 to 15 cloture votes in a year on nominations. This year we have had 63 cloture votes on the nominations. Thats not comparable to where we were. It is an acceleration. I would say to this body we all know the direction of this body. We are 63 cloture votes on the nominations now for this president when the president ial Party Changes there will be a future democratic president and republicans will say they did 63 to us we will do 122 then and the next time it will be 240 as we have watched this over the last 20 years of slowly go up year by year i dont know how that turns around until this body determines that its going to turn around. Enough is enough. The rules of the senate are not just something we can complain and do nothing about. The senators control the rules of the senate and at some point we have to determine this is getting out of hand we have to be able to solve it. I wasnt here in 2013 when the option was invoke invoked that d the stories and frustration that was the rising and as my democratic colleagues believe that republicans were pushing it too far so they determined something has to be done. I would just say i have the sense that we are in a very similar position. This can be pushed too far and at some point republicans will respond and something has to be done. For the sake of the future, not just of this administration but for the sake of the future we have to determine how we are going to do this and put it in place in a way that actually works. Senator merkley is my nextdoor neighbor. I was probably in the senate three weeks and he reached out to me and said can we sit and talk about the rules. Ive heard you mention some things about rules. I sat in his office and we we se a commonality on a lot of the issues in the sense that we have to find a way to resolve these issues, not just talk about them but figure out how it is going to work longterm. He had a proposal to take over nominations to two hours except for Supreme Court nominations. Not a lot of debate happens on the floor anymore. Most of it happens in committee and now the 51 votes for all nominees the outcome is most often searched and so it is really determined before we ever get there the issue is are we going to do legislation and nominations or only nominations. As i mentioned in my written testimony, the term in the first 100 days can never be a marker again because from here on out every president in the first 100 days will get their cabinet in place or be able to move legislation because they wont be able to get personnel because it will be titfortat for here on out. Losing that time period is a great loss to the American People and it is unexplainable to those in the senate. My proposal is simple. Lets take the role done with wide bipartisan support and would speak it permanent and say this is how we are going to continue to function from here on out. If there is a better idea to do it i am willing to be able to take it on and say what can we do to fix this for the best idea ive had to take one i was already gone and agreed on and say lets make it permanent and go from here on out. Id bi would be glad to entertan questions. Senator langford of the senate has confirmed approximately 260 as my understanding of the president s civilian executive branch nominees. On average it has taken the senate 71 days to confirm. How do these figures compare with what the senate has done in the past administrations . It is the same advance he would consider. It took about 50 days during the Obama Administration in 30 or 40 during the Bush Administration and the Clinton Administration so we are watching thi watchingy inch up as well. Youve also been looted to the impact on the executive branch whether its democrat or republican. Do you know which departments have been hit hardest b the hare current confirmation slowdown and what are some of the other realworld implications and how much of your proposal alleviates this . The state department and dod. The state department has 22 or so are currently pendin that arg and they have a large number of them in the process. The dod has about 15 that they are waiting on. Realworld implications are things weve seen from the constituent services. I will give you one example we have qualifiers moving through western oklahoma and through southern kansas. We have a wildfire larger than the state of rhode island that was burning. They needed a confirmed individual to be able to get some answers back on that and we didnt have a confirmed individuals and farmer for farmd ranchers have to wait for weeks until there was a confirmed individual to answer the questions to start the process, so they were literally living off of the hate of us being donated from others because they couldnt get the Disaster Relief a confirmed individual would have been just immediate. You eluded to wasting time on a lot of it. Cloture has become a routine part of the confirmation process even for nominees that enjoy broad bipartisan support. The confirmation of david to as some of you may recall to be the District Court judge is an example of this. His nomination was subject to the cloture process and extended postcloture debate even though he was ultimately confirmed by a vote of 1000. What would be the reason to force a debate on a nominee that enjoys this type of support in other words it looks like it would be common sense to move these people. The joy of the senate is the minority can express their displeasure in a multitude of different ways and even for an individual