[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 23 (Monday, February 13, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S554-S558]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXECUTIVE SESSION
F_____
NOMINATION OF ADALBERTO JOSE JORDAN TO BE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination,
which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read the nomination of Adalberto Jose Jordan,
of Florida, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Eleventh Circuit.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 1 hour
for debate, equally divided, in the usual form.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time be
divided in such a way that the time will run out at 5:30 but divided
equally between now and then, between myself or my designee and the
Republican leader or his designee.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, it pains me, in a way, to have to come and
talk about this. This is the eighth time the majority leader has had to
file a cloture motion to overcome yet another Republican filibuster of
one of President Obama's superbly qualified judicial nominees. I have
been here during the time of President Ford, President Carter,
President Reagan, President George H.W. Bush, President Clinton,
President George W. Bush, and now President Obama. I have been here
when the Senate was in Republican
[[Page S555]]
control and when it was in Democratic control. Never during all that
time have I seen anything where the majority leader has had to file so
many cloture motions on superbly qualified judicial nominees, whether
it is a Republican or Democratic President.
The nominee we have before us is a former Federal prosecutor and
current Federal District Court judge in the Southern District of
Florida. Judge Adalberto Jordan is the kind of nominee who in the past
would have been confirmed without delay. It probably would have been
done on a voice vote shortly after having come out of our committee,
rather than having to wait 4 months for Senators to consent to proceed
on his nomination.
This nomination has the strong and committed support of the senior
Senator from Florida, Mr. Nelson, as well as that of Mr. Rubio, the
other Senator from Florida. Not only does he have the support of the
two Senators, one a Democratic Senator the other a Republican, but the
distinguished Presiding Officer will recall that when we voted on him
last October, every single Republican and every single Democrat on the
Judiciary Committee voted for him. He came out unanimously. It would be
a little bit strange if any of those Senators now switched their votes
because there is nothing different today than there was back in October
of last fall.
When he was nominated to the District Court by President Clinton in
1999, even while Senate Republicans were pocket filibustering more than
60 of President Clinton's judicial nominees, Judge Jordan was confirmed
without delay. It was an overwhelming vote: 93 to 1. Any of us in
elective office would like to have had margins such as that.
The needless delay in Judge Jordan's nomination is the latest example
of the tactics that have all but paralyzed the Senate confirmation
process. They are actually damaging our Federal courts. It should not
take 4 months and a cloture motion, which is hard to schedule because
of all the other things we have to do, just to proceed to a nomination
such as that of Judge Jordan to fill a judicial emergency.
This is not just filling a normal vacancy, it is a judicial emergency
on the Eleventh Circuit. This good judge has already demonstrated as a
Federal prosecutor and as a district judge his qualities. They need him
on the Eleventh Circuit.
It should not take many more months and more cloture motions before
the Senate finally votes on the nearly 20 other superbly qualified
judicial nominees who have been stalled by Senate Republicans for
months while vacancies continue to plague our American courts and delay
justice for the American people. At all these courts where they are
bottlenecked because there is no judge, the people who have cases in
those courts do not say: I am a Republican or I am a Democrat, they say
I have an important case to be heard. Why won't the Senate confirm the
judge who has been nominated?
On every single one of the judges that are being stalled, every
single Democratic Senator has agreed long ago to a vote. The objection
on every single one of these judges being held up is because of
Republican objections.
Let's talk about Judge Jordan for a moment, why he is so exceptional.
When he is confirmed, he will be the first Cuban-born judge to serve on
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which encompasses
Florida, Georgia and Alabama. Born in Havana, Cuba, Judge Jordan
immigrated to the United States at age six. He went on to graduate
summa cum laude from the University of Miami law school. Following law
school, he clerked for Judge Thomas Clark on the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Eleventh Circuit, the Court to which he is nominated, and
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the U.S. Supreme Court. He then became a
Federal prosecutor in the Southern District of Florida, where he served
as Deputy Chief and then Chief of the Appellate Division. Judge Jordan
has also been a professor. Since 1990, he has taught at his alma mater,
the University of Miami School of Law, as well as the Florida
International University College of Law.
It is no surprise that the ABA's Standing Committee on the Federal
Judiciary unanimously rated Judge Jordan ``well qualified'' to serve on
the Eleventh Circuit, the highest possible rating from its nonpartisan
peer review. Everybody should be down here cheering and supporting this
nomination. He should be commended and supported, not filibustered and
obstructed. Judge Jordan is a consensus nominee. What has the Senate
come to, if somebody such as this man has to go through and overcome a
filibuster to be confirmed? At this moment, ``Moses the Lawgiver''
would have a hard time being confirmed.
I say this because this judge is the kind of consensus nominee I have
been urging Senate Republicans to stop stalling. He represents the kind
of consensus nominees this President has sent the Senate who have been
needlessly and harmfully stalled in the Senate for months and months
for no good reason. It needs to stop. Last Thursday, Professor Carl
Tobias wrote: ``Most troubling has been Republican refusal to vote on
noncontroversial, strong nominees--inaction that conflicts with a
venerable Senate tradition. When the chamber has eventually voted on
nominees, the Senate has overwhelmingly approved many.'' I expect Judge
Jordan to be confirmed with a strong, bipartisan vote, as well. There
is no justification for delaying this action over the last 4 months
while a judicial emergency vacancy has gone unfilled. There is no
justifiable reason for forcing the majority leader to file cloture for
the Senate to hold a vote on this qualified consensus nominee. There is
no justification for Senate Republicans' refusal to hold votes on
nearly 20 Senate nominees who also remain stalled waiting for a vote.
The filibuster of Judge Jordan is just the current example of Senate
Republicans' delaying tactics with respect to President Obama's
qualified consensus nominees.
Let me give you a little history and a few facts. As we enter the
fourth year of President Obama's administration, we are far behind the
pace set by the Senate during President George W. Bush's first term. By
the end of 2004, the Senate in those 48 months confirmed 205 district
and circuit nominees. One hundred of them were confirmed during the 17
months that I was chairman of the Judiciary Committee. I moved
President Bush's judges notwithstanding the fact that 60 of President
Clinton's judges had been pocket filibustered. I wanted to change that
for the good of the Federal judiciary. I wanted to restore respect in
the Senate as well as the Federal judiciary, but now we have gone back
to the same old Republican obstructionism.
The Senate has confirmed only 126 of President Obama's district and
circuit nominees, nowhere near the pace there was for President Bush.
That leaves 86 judicial vacancies. In fact, the vacancy rate is likely
to remain twice what it was in 2004. But I would suggest to this body
that the slow pace of confirmation of President Obama's judicial
nominees is no accident. It is the result of deliberate obstruction and
delays. For the second year in a row, the Senate Republican leadership
ignored long-established precedent and refused to schedule any votes
before the December recess on the nearly 20 consensus judicial nominees
who had been favorably reported by the Judiciary Committee. Here we are
in the middle of February, fighting to hold a vote on 1 of the 19
nominees who should have been confirmed last year. Fifteen of the
nominees stalled by Senate Republicans were reported with the unanimous
support of their home state Senators and every Republican and every
Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
During President Bush's administration, Republican Senators insisted
that filibusters of judicial nominees were unconstitutional. They
threatened the ``nuclear option'' in 2005 to guarantee up-or-down votes
for each of President Bush's judicial nominees. Many of them said they
would never, ever support the filibuster of a judicial nomination--
never. Well, that never lasted. Once President Obama, a Democratic
President, came in, the Senate Republicans reversed course. They
filibustered President Obama's very first judicial nomination, that of
Judge David Hamilton of Indiana, a widely-respected 15-year veteran of
the Federal bench who had the support of the most senior and longest-
serving Republican in the Senate, Senator Lugar. The Senate rejected
that filibuster and
[[Page S556]]
Judge Hamilton was fortunately confirmed. The same Senators who had
said solemnly on the floor of the Senate that they would never
filibuster a judicial nomination--oh well, we have a new Democratic
President, now we ought to filibuster. Come on. You wonder why people
are concerned about those who represent them.
In fact, that first filibuster portended what was going to happen,
and the partisan delays and opposition have continued. Senate
Republicans have required cloture votes even for nominees who
ultimately were confirmed unanimously when the Senate finally overcame
those filibusters and voted on their nomination. So it was with Judge
Barbara Keenan of the Fourth Circuit, who was confirmed 99-0 when the
filibuster of her nomination finally ended in 2010, and Judge Denny
Chin of the Second Circuit, an outstanding nominee with 16 years
judicial experience, who was ultimately confirmed 98-0 when the
Republican filibuster was overcome after four months of needless
delays.
Regrettably, Senate Republicans have successfully filibustered the
nominations of Goodwin Liu and Caitlin Halligan. I have warned that
Senate Republicans have imposed a new standard that threatened to make
confirmation of any nominee to the D.C. Circuit virtually impossible in
the future. At the time, The Washington Post noted: ``GOP senators are
grasping at straws to block Ms. Halligan's ascension, perhaps in hopes
of preserving the vacancy for a Republican president to fill.'' I urged
Senate Republicans to stop playing politics with the D.C. Circuit, and
to allow an up-or-down vote on Ms. Halligan after more than 15 months
of delay. Regrettably, the nomination of such a highly-qualified public
servant, who had the support of law enforcement, appellate advocates,
former Supreme Court clerks, academics and practitioners from across
the political spectrum, was prevented from an up or down vote.
But I would also say that aside from the gamesmanship involved, this
obstruction hurts the whole country. There are currently 86 judicial
vacancies across the country. That means nearly 1 out of every 10
Federal judgeships is vacant. The vacancy rate is nearly double what it
had been reduced to by this point in the Bush administration when
Democrats, showing unprecedented speed, cooperated to bring judicial
vacancies down to 46.
It is the American people who pay the price for the Senate's
unnecessary and harmful delay in confirming judges to our Federal
courts. It is unacceptable for hardworking Americans who are seeking
their day in court to find one in 10 of those courts vacant. When an
injured plaintiff sues to help cover the cost of medical expenses, that
plaintiff should not have to wait for years before a judge hears his or
her case. When two small business owners disagree over a contract, they
should not have to wait years for a court to resolve their dispute.
With 18 more judicial nominees stalled and cloture motions being
required for consensus nominees, the Senate is failing in its
responsibility, harming our Federal courts and ultimately hurting the
American people. If you are one of the people seeking justice in a
Federal court--and here is a sign saying: Closed; nobody at home--when
you imagine this happening, is it any wonder that only 10 percent of
the American people view Congress favorably? Actually with this kind of
activity, I am surprised it gets up to 10 percent. I am wondering
whether my friends on the other side of the aisle, the Senate
Republicans, are intent on bringing the approval rating even lower,
into single digits.
Some Senate Republicans are now seeking to excuse these months of
delay by blaming President Obama for forcing them to do it. They point
to President Obama's recent recess appointments of a Director for the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and members of the National Labor
Relations Board. Of course, those appointments were made a few weeks
ago, long after the delay of Judge Jordan's nomination began. Moreover,
the President took his action because Senate Republicans had refused to
vote on those executive nominations and were intent on rendering the
government agencies unable to enforce the law and carry out their
critical work on behalf of the American people. Some Senate Republicans
are doubling down on their obstruction in response. They are apparently
extending their blockage against nominees beyond executive branch
nominees to these much-needed judicial nominees. This needless
obstruction accentuates the burdens on our Federal courts and delays in
justice to the American people. We can ill afford these additional
delays and protest votes. The Senate needs, instead, to come together
to address the needs of hardworking Americans around the country.
Judge Adalberto Jose Jordan is precisely the kind of qualified
consensus nominee we need. He is the kind of person we all will say,
when the press asks, this is the kind of nominee we need; this would
help our country and our judicial system if we had this kind of
nominee. But then we filibuster.
When introducing Judge Jordan to the Senate Judiciary Committee last
October, Senator Rubio praised the nominee's knowledge of the law,
experience, participation in community, stating that ``he looks forward
to [Judge Jordan's] appointment.'' I certainly believe what Senator
Rubio said. I find him to be very truthful in these things. The day we
reported him out of the committee unanimously, every single Democratic
Senator in this Chamber was ready to go forward with the vote. The only
place we had objections was on the Republican side, and that has gone
on for 4 months.
I hope we get this cloture vote and the Senate is finally allowed to
vote to confirm this nomination. Again, I urge Senate Republicans to
stop the destructive delays that plague the confirmation process. The
American people deserve Federal courts ready to serve them, not empty
benches, not long delays, not partisan games.
I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum, and I ask
consent that the time be equally divided.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk
will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that
the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I wish to speak today, along
with my colleague from Florida, Senator Rubio, about the nomination of
Judge Adalberto Jordan. A lot of our folks refer to him as Judge
Jordan. He has been nominated to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
At this time, when we have a very sizable judicial vacancy rate with a
lot of these judicial positions empty, we need to get them filled with
qualified judges who are going to rule and rule expeditiously.
Confirming Judge Jordan to the Eleventh Circuit, which is one of the
busiest in the country, is going to be a good step forward in filling
the need for all of these judges.
We have in Florida a long history of bipartisan support for our
judicial nominees. That is especially so with my colleague Marco Rubio,
as we participate with our judicial nominating commission, which the
two of us appoint, and they screen and interview the applicants for the
vacancies on the district court. As a result, we have nominees who come
to us who have already been screened, and it takes the politics out of
it. In the case of Judge Jordan, it is a continuation of that
bipartisan support even though he did not go through that process. He
was selected by the President and is a sitting Federal judge who has an
excellent record, and thus we see the bipartisan support.
Judge Jordan received his undergraduate and his law degrees from the
University of Miami. After law school, he clerked for Judge Thomas
Clark on the Eleventh Circuit. Then he moved on to become a clerk for
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. He continued his legal career in private
practice at Steel, Hector & Davis and then became an assistant U.S.
attorney in the appellate division of the Southern District of Florida.
He began his judicial career in 1999 as a U.S. district court judge for
the Southern District of Florida, where he still sits.
Based on his experience, Judge Jordan is extremely qualified for this
position. Once confirmed, he will become
[[Page S557]]
the first Hispanic judge on the Eleventh Circuit Court. So I urge our
colleagues to confirm this nominee without further delay.
I am pleased to be joined by my colleague, Senator Rubio, from the
State of Florida.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, I thank Senator Nelson for that
introduction.
The first thing we have to decide is how to pronounce his last name.
Everyone knows whom we are talking about. He has an extraordinary
reputation in our community.
I have a few things I wish to add. I have a bias because I also
graduated from the University of Miami School of Law, where I have both
my law degree and my student loan, so I am grateful to them for that.
He was only 37 years old when he was appointed to the bench. It says
a lot that over the years he has garnered a reputation for being fair
but also for his intellect. He is highly regarded for his intellect.
One will find in legal circles particularly in south Florida that Judge
Jordan is somebody for whom people have a tremendous amount of respect,
not just for his fairness but for his intellect, his ability to
understand complex legal issues. His background is one that would lead
a person to that conclusion. He was the chief of the appellate division
in the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District, which is
extremely busy, one of the busiest districts in the country for the
Justice Department. As Senator Nelson has already pointed out, he spent
a year clerking on the U.S. Supreme Court. He also clerked with the
Eleventh Circuit, where he now seeks to return and hopefully will
return today as one of its judges.
Let me say a couple of things about the Eleventh Circuit. It has two
current vacancies--one in Florida and one in Georgia. It is the busiest
per judge in the entire country. They have caseloads that range in
cases from Florida, Georgia, and Alabama. They include death penalty
appeals. It is so overwhelming that they routinely invite judges from
other circuits to hear its cases. So it is critically important that we
fill these vacancies, and that is hopefully what we will do today.
There are a couple more points I wish to make about the judge. He
continues to be very involved in our community, both through his family
and as an individual. He teaches courses at both the University of
Miami School of Law and at the Florida International College of Law,
which is a new school that started operations a few years ago.
He is an integral part of my community. I can tell my colleagues on
both sides of the aisle that, being from south Florida, running in the
same circles in which he has run in terms of the legal community, he is
highly respected. I think as a nation we are fortunate to have someone
such as Judge Jordan, who is willing to bypass the many comforts of
private practice and serve his country in a role such as this. I hope
that as a body we will confirm him in an overwhelming and bipartisan
fashion.
With that, I thank the Chair for this opportunity, and I suggest the
absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, we are considering the nomination of
Judge Jordan to be a U.S. circuit judge for the Eleventh Circuit. He is
going to fill the vacancy that has been created by Judge Susan Black
taking senior status.
Looking back, I think the Senate accomplished much last year, passing
legislation and confirming a significant number of judicial and
executive nominations. I would note that even the majority leader
recognized we have done a good job on nominations and have accomplished
quite a bit as well.
We could have confirmed more nominees had the President indicated he
would respect the practice and precedent on recess appointments. He
would not give the Senate that assurance, so a number of nominations
could not be confirmed and now remain on the Executive Calendar. As it
turned out, the President went on to violate the practice and
precedent.
I wish to remind my colleagues and those who might be listening that
the Constitution outlines two ways in which the President may make
appointments: One is with the advice and consent of the Senate; the
other is he may make temporary appointments when a vacancy in one of
those offices happens when the Senate is in recess. Given that the
Senate was not in recess, it seems clear to me that advice and consent
was required but not obtained by the President.
It is for the Senate to determine its own rules and procedures,
including designation of when it is in recess, within the constraints
of the constitutional provisions found in article I. Consequently, this
is not a matter within the purview of the executive branch. In other
words, under the Constitution of the United States, the President is in
no position to tell the Senate when we adjourn and when we do not
adjourn.
These so-called recess appointments break a longstanding tradition.
They violate precedents followed as recently as 2008 under President
Bush.
This is a matter of concern to my Republican colleagues, as it should
be for all Senators. In fact, I am quite puzzled and disappointed by
the silence from the other side. This is more than just a policy issue
or disagreement on a particular nominee. The underlying concern is a
power grab by the President. I would think all Senators would rise to
defend the prerogatives of the Senate and the constitutional principles
which have been violated by the President. In other words, if the
Constitution of the United States says the Senate determines when we
are in adjournment, how does the President get the power to do that?
When a President thinks he can do anything the Constitution does not
expressly prohibit, the danger arises that his advisers will feel
pressure to say the Constitution does not stand in the way.
At that point, a President is no longer a constitutional figure with
limited powers, as the Founders intended. Quite to the contrary, the
President looks more and more like a King the Constitution was designed
to replace. You remember George III, I hope.
Generally, I am willing to give the President's nominees the benefit
of the doubt when the nominee on the surface meets the requirements I
have previously outlined. But as I have indicated over the past few
weeks, we are not operating under normal circumstances. The atmosphere
the President has created with his disregard for constitutional
principles has made it difficult to give his nominees any benefit of
the doubt.
Despite the conditions the President has created, the committee is
moving forward with hearings and with markups. As we see, we continue
to have floor votes and confirmations. We are making progress.
This will be President Obama's 26th circuit nominee whom we have
confirmed. That means over 62 percent of the President's circuit judge
nominees have been confirmed. This is the same pace of confirmation for
President Bush's circuit nominees at a comparable point in his first
term.
Furthermore, President Obama's nominees are moving through the
process at a quicker pace. The average time for President Obama's
circuit nominees to be confirmed is about 140 days. For President Bush,
the average time was quite longer, at 350 days--more than twice as
long.
With regard to judicial vacancies, I would note progress has been
made. We have made significant reductions in the vacancy rate. I hear
some mistakenly state that the vacancy rate is at historic highs. The
claim is not true. I would point out that the current vacancy rate is
about where it was at the beginning of the Presidency of George W.
Bush. In terms of historical highs, I would like to remind my
colleagues of some history. When George H.W. Bush assumed the
Presidency, the vacancy rate was around 5 percent. During his term, the
Democratic majority in the Senate let the vacancy rate rise to 16
percent--nearly double what it is today.
[[Page S558]]
Those who continue to complain about vacancy rate should also be
reminded that for more than half the vacancies, the President has
failed to even submit a nomination to the Senate. This has been a
pattern throughout this administration. This is the case even for
vacancies designated as judicial emergencies. Nineteen of those thirty-
three emergency vacancies have no nominee. Furthermore, President Obama
is significantly behind in the number of nominations he has made. So it
is no surprise he would be a little behind in the confirmations as
well. In other words, if the President wants the Senate to move faster,
send the nominations up here.
I would like to say a few words about the nominee we will be voting
on today. Judge Jordan presently serves as a U.S. district judge for
the Southern District of Florida. He was appointed to that court
byPresident Clinton in 1999, and was confirmed by the Senate later that
year.
He received a bachelor of arts from the University of Miami in 1984,
his juris doctorate from the University of Miami School of Law in 1987.
Upon graduating from law school, the nominee clerked for Thomas A.
Clark of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and then
for Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. He then began his legal
career as an associate attorney with Steel Hector & Davis where he
handled first amendment matters and commercial litigation cases.
In 1994, he became an assistant U.S. attorney in the appellate
division of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of
Florida. He was made deputy chief of the division in 1996, and chief in
1998. The nominee also worked as an adjunct professor of law at the
University of Miami School of Law since 1990. He has taught many
courses, including a death penalty seminar, federal courts, a judicial
inherent power seminar, and a Federal criminal practice seminar.
Since becoming a district judge in 1999, he has presided over nearly
200 cases and has sat by designation frequently on the Eleventh Circuit
Court of Appeals.
The American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Federal
Judiciary has rated this nominee with a unanimous ``Well Qualified''
rating. I concur in that rating and will support the nomination.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the cloture motion
having been presented under rule XXII, the clerk will report the
motion.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
hereby move to bring to a close the debate on the nomination
of Adalberto Jose Jordan, of Florida, to be United States
Circuit Judge for the Eleventh Circuit:
Harry Reid, Joe Manchin III, Sherrod Brown, Tom Udall,
Patty Murray, Mark Begich, Herb Kohl, Bill Nelson,
Frank R. Lautenberg, Jeanne Shaheen, Richard
Blumenthal, Benjamin L. Cardin, Chris Coons, Dianne
Feinstein, Patrick J. Leahy, Richard J. Durbin, Joseph
I. Lieberman, Charles E. Schumer
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the
nomination of Adalberto Jose Jordan, of Florida, to be U.S. Circuit
Judge for the Eleventh Circuit shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu)
and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Lieberman) are necessarily
absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Utah (Mr. Hatch), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. DeMint),
the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), and the Senator from Texas (Mrs.
Hutchison).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch)
would have voted ``yea'' and the Senator from South Carolina (Mr.
DeMint) would have voted ``nay.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Hagan). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 89, nays 5, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 18 Ex.]
YEAS--89
Akaka
Alexander
Ayotte
Barrasso
Baucus
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Blumenthal
Boozman
Boxer
Brown (MA)
Brown (OH)
Burr
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Coats
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Coons
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
Durbin
Enzi
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Hagan
Harkin
Heller
Hoeven
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson (SD)
Johnson (WI)
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lugar
Manchin
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Moran
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (NE)
Nelson (FL)
Portman
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Risch
Roberts
Rockefeller
Rubio
Sanders
Schumer
Sessions
Shaheen
Shelby
Snowe
Stabenow
Tester
Thune
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NAYS--5
Blunt
Lee
Paul
Toomey
Vitter
NOT VOTING--6
DeMint
Hatch
Hutchison
Kirk
Landrieu
Lieberman
The motion was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 89, the nays are 5.
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in the
affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
The Senator from Vermont.
____________________