Prepared Floor Statement of Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa
Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee
The Nuclear Option and Judicial Nominations
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
Mr. President,
At the beginning of this Congress the Majority and Minority leaders reached an agreement on how to proceed with Rules Changes. A bargain was reached.
We agreed to two Rules changes, one change in the Standing Rules, and one Standing Order. Senate Republicans gave up certain rights and protections in those Rules changes. That was the first part of the agreement.
In exchange for those Rules changes, the Majority Leader gave his word to the Republican Senators that he would not utilize the ‘Nuclear Option’ during this Congress.
Let me review the exact wording of that agreement, as it is recorded in the Congressional Record.
This year, on January 24, 2013, the following exchange took place on the Senate floor.
Senator McConnell stated: “Finally, I would confirm with the majority leader that the Senate would not consider other resolutions relating to any standing order or rules this Congress unless they went through the regular order process?”
The Majority Leader replied: “That is correct. Any other resolutions related to Senate procedure would be subject to a regular order process including consideration by the Rules Committee.”
In fact, the Majority Leader gave his word at the beginning of the last Congress, as well.
He stated:
“The minority leader and I have discussed this issue on numerous occasions. I know that there is a strong interest in rules changes among many in my caucus. In fact, I would support many of these changes through regular order. But I agree that the proper way to change Senate rules is through the procedures established in those rules, and I will oppose any effort in this Congress or the next to change the Senate's rules other than through the regular order.”
Let me just say that when a United States Senator reaches an agreement and gives his word that he will stick to that agreement, that should mean something around here.
And let me emphasize something further. There was no contingency on that agreement. Republicans agreed to a change in the Rules and the Majority Leader gave his word that he would not invoke the so-called “nuclear option.” That was the extent of the agreement. Period.
I trust The Majority Leader will keep his word and his commitment. If he pulls back on that commitment, it would irreparably damage the Senate.
Moreover, the notion that there now is a “crisis” that demands another Rules change is completely manufactured. The Minority Leader has spoken about this culture of intimidation. I am troubled that it is finding its way into the Senate.
For the record, so far this year we have confirmed 22 lower court nominees, with two more scheduled for this week. That is more than double the number of judges that were confirmed at this point in President Bush’s second term. With the nominations this week, we will have confirmed 195 of President Obama’s nominees as lower court judges. We have defeated 2.
The claims that we are obstructing nominees are plainly without foundation. I have cooperated with the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee in moving forward on consensus nominees. And on the Senate floor, there has been consistent and steady progress on judicial nominations.
Yet, it seems as if the majority is intent on creating a false crisis, in order to effect changes in longstanding Senate practices. They are now even threatening to break the rules to change the rules.
Again, I hope the Majority Leader keeps his word. We certainly have upheld our end of the bargain.
-30-