BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I wish to share some thoughts about the filling of the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals judgeships. I have been involved in that issue for well over a decade. We started looking at the case numbers when President Clinton was in office. I, along with Senator Chuck Grassley, both Republicans, blocked President Bush from filling a vacancy, because that court did not need another judge and they wanted to fill it. Let's be frank. Presidents want to fill the DC Circuit Court of Appeals because they think they can shift the balance there and be able to advance their agenda throughout the judicial process because a lot of key cases are filed there, and lobbyists and outside forces that care about judges want the Presidents to put their kind of people in those positions--maybe even their law partner or their friend or their political buddy on that court. But there are some great judges on the court. But I am Ranking Republican on the Budget Committee also. I serve on the Judiciary Committee and on the Budget Committee. We have no money in this country to fund a judgeship that is not needed.
The last time we were able to move one of those judges to the Ninth Circuit where the position was needed. Today, it is clear that the caseload for the DC Circuit continues to fall. The number of cases per judge in the DC Circuit continues to decline. Senator Grassley has been a champion of this issue for years. He chaired the court subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee. I chaired it after he did. We have seen these numbers.
Senator Durbin says, Oh, it is a shame. It is a shame these nominees don't get confirmed. As Senator McConnell noted, it was a shame that Peter Keisler, a fabulous nominee, didn't get confirmed. But, in all honesty, the court didn't need that slot filled and they don't need any of the three slots today that are vacant. They do not need to be filled. Congress has no responsibility to fill a vacancy that is not needed, and we shouldn't do it. Each one costs about $1 million a year. That is what it costs to fill a judgeship.
We have needs around the country. We have certain needs around the country, and we are going to have to add judges. Why would we fill slots with judges we don't need and not fill slots with judges we do need? That is my fundamental view about it. I will just say this: It is not going to happen. We are not going to fill these slots. This country is in deep financial trouble.
The majority basically is saying: Oh, the Budget Control Act and, oh, we have cut to the bone. We can't find another dime in savings. Do you know what the problem is, America? You haven't sent us enough money. If you would just send more money to Washington, we could spread it around and everything would be fine.
This is basically what we are hearing from the leadership: No more cuts. In fact, the Budget Control Act reduced spending too much. Oh, this is critically important. Every dollar we spend is critically important and we can't reduce a dime of it or even the growth of it. That is what we have been hearing: Send more money to Washington. We want to raise taxes. We are open about demanding increases in taxes to fund whatever it is we want to spend.
Is there any waste and abuse in this government? There absolutely is. Look at this chart. Senator Durbin is on the Judiciary Committee. He has been involved in this. He knows these numbers. There is nothing phony about what I am showing my colleagues today. This is absolute fact: Total appeals filed per active judge. These are the judges on the court today. The DC Circuit has eight judges. They have eight judges. The number of appeals filed per judge in their court is 149, and the average per circuit judge in America is 383. The average is 2 1/2 times that number. We do not need to fill these slots.
Look at the Eleventh Circuit. They have vacancies, but at this point they are doing almost 800 cases per judge per year. Think about that. In the Second Circuit, which is Manhattan--a very important circuit with very complex cases--there are more than 2 1/2 times the number of cases than the DC Circuit. Remember, this is the current number of judges, I say to my colleagues. This isn't if we were to add three more judges. If we added three more judges, it would be a little over 100 cases per judge, not 149. This is absolute fact. They take the entire summer off. No other circuit does this. They have canceled oral arguments they had scheduled because there were no cases to argue. They take the summer off.
I talked to one circuit judge in another circuit who said: At least one of the judges in the DC Circuit goes around the country sometimes and helps out, but none of our judges can because we are so busy we don't have time to do it.
Most of our judges are working very hard. I am a total believer in the integrity and the value of the Federal judiciary. I respect them greatly. They do important work. But it has just so happened in the course of our American system that the DC Circuit is at a point where it has the lowest caseload per judge in decades, of any circuit and it needs to be fixed and the number of cases continues to decline.
So what I would say to my colleagues is I believe we should give deference to the President in the nomination of judges. I voted for, I am sure, close to 90 percent of the nominations the President has submitted. I voted for almost 90 percent, I would suggest. But I am not going to support three judges we don't need. The last thing we need to be doing is burning on the Mall of the United States of America $3 million a year to fund judgeships we don't need. There are other places in this government we can cut wasteful spending as well, but this one highlights the situation.
I suggest to my colleagues this is a test to this Senate. This is a test for all of the Members of the Senate. If we say there is no place to save money in Washington; if we say we have found every bit of waste, fraud, and abuse there is--well, look at this court.
I am not condemning any of the nominees. I am not complaining about their quality or their ability. I am saying the taxpayers of America should not have extracted from them another $3 million a year to fund three judges that absolutely are not needed, particularly when we have legitimate needs in other courts around the country that need more judges.
Look at the Eleventh Circuit, my circuit: Almost 800 cases per judge filed. This circuit, the DC Circuit, 149, and they want three more judges--not so.
I believe we have a 10-minute limit. How much time remains?
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. SESSIONS. So, in conclusion, I appreciate the opportunity to be here. It looks as though we will vote on the Millett nomination maybe later today. With no personal criticism of that nominee in any way, I think it is important for us to say we just don't need these slots. We are not going to fill them. Not one of the three needs to be filled. We are not going to fill any of them. We are going to honor the finances of the American people.
Once again, I express my appreciation to Senator Chuck Grassley, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, who has led the fight on this issue for a number of years. I have worked with him on it. We have legislation to transfer these judgeships to other places. That is what we should be doing, moving them to where they are needed. It has been great to work with Senator Grassley.
I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT