Over the last several weeks, I have been working to reach an understanding on how this Committee will handle nominations. A number of procedural and substantive issues have been raised in these regards for both Executive Branch and Judicial Branch nominations. The Democratic Members have sought to work out arrangements and understandings so that all Members of the Committee would know what our rules are, know what our practices and procedures will be, and understand how this Committee will approach our important responsibilities with respect to nominations.

Over the last two weeks the Chairman’s insistence that the Committee proceed with nominations before those practices and procedures had been agreed upon has lead to public reference to outstanding issues that we should have resolved and resolved first. I always regret when we are not able to work out matters through reason and cooperation. I do not believe it was appropriate for Republican Members of this Committee to deride Democratic Members as acting "irresponsibly" or "despicably" or "in breach of their constitutional duties." I know that it was not helpful.

Nonetheless, I was proud of the Democratic Members of this Committee when we jointly sent our May 4 letter to the Chairman and provided the way out of the impasse in spite of the name calling. A few days later the Chairman responded with language that reflected our respectful tone and for which I thank him.

While I disagree with much of what the Chairman argues and asserts in his letter, I appreciate that he has now indicated that with respect to judicial nominations, he, "intends to be fully respectful of [Democratic Senators’] views and will assist in any way to ensure that you and our other Senate colleagues receive real, meaningful consultation by the White House on judicial nominees." I appreciate that in his letter he writes that he, "respect[s our] views and efforts in ensuring [we] will be appropriately consulted in a meaningful manner on nominees to vacancies in [our] home states." I ask that the letter setting forth the position of the Democratic Members of the Committee on our expectation that the practices and procedures of the Committee under the Chairmanship of Senator Hatch remain unchanged with respect to Committee consideration of judicial nominees and the letter from Senator Hatch be made a part of this record.

For the last several weeks, we have also been seeking to resolve concerns about how this Committee handles certain confidential information about nominations, information that may reflect on their fitness and may be relevant to how Senators in this Committee vote on reporting nominations to the Senate and how Senators vote on confirmations. Those concerns have been pending for several weeks now, as well, without resolution. Those concerns are what prompted our request for an executive session in accordance with Rule 26.5 of the Standing Rules of the Senate so that we could discuss these very important matters fully and in accordance with the confidentiality rules that bind us.

Those concerns made it inappropriate to proceed on certain matters over the last few weeks. Although our Republican colleagues knew about our concerns, they nonetheless berated us without any acknowledgment that those open issues, which affect executive as well as judicial nominations, were still unresolved. That, too, was most unfortunate.

Over the last several days I have also reached out to the Bush Administration to work with us on ways to resolve these concerns. Those outreach efforts may provide the opportunity to reach a mutually acceptable resolution of these matters. I hope so.

In light of the cooperation we began receiving from the Administration last week, we were able to proceed to report and confirm Larry Thompson to be the Deputy Attorney General at the Department of Justice and Dan Bryant to be the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legislative Affairs. I understand that they were sworn in last Friday and, again, congratulate them and their families.

I have spoken to Attorney General Ashcroft about the staffing needs of the Department of Justice and assured him that I will do my part. For those with short memories, I note that Attorney General Ashcroft was confirmed 6 weeks before Attorney General Reno’s confirmation in the last Administration and the Deputy Attorney General was confirmed 3 weeks before his counterpart in the last Administration. Assistant Attorney General Bryant was confirmed 7 weeks before his counterpart in the previous Administration.

The Committee is moving expeditiously on the Administration’s nominations to the Department of Justice. Indeed, we are ahead of the confirmations schedule of the Clinton Administration for each and every nominee confirmed to date and to this corresponding date in 1993.

The Clinton Administration’s Assistant Attorney General to head the Criminal Division was not confirmed until November. The Committee is proceeding to consider the Chertoff nomination this week, after a hearing last week. That is extremely expeditious. Indeed, in spite of Mr. Chertoff’s role as the lead counsel to the Republicans in the Whitewater investigation, an extremely partisan effort, we are moving ahead. Mr. Chertoff explained at his hearing that he understands the role of the head of the Criminal Division and will carry out those functions without regard to politics or partisanship. I believe him and look forward to working with him.

The Assistant Attorney General to head the Office for Policy Development in the last Administration was not confirmed until August, 95 days after her nomination. Professor Dinh did not return his responses to written questions until this Tuesday. He was prematurely placed on the Committee agenda last week. Now that his responses are in, he is being considered and reported out this week, months ahead of his counterpart in the last Administration. Professor Dinh worked closely with Mr. Chertoff on the Senate Whitewater investigation and has been active in a number of Republican campaigns. His nomination is nonetheless being considered without delay.

While we consider the current nominations, the many dedicated employees at the Department of Justice continue to work, to do their jobs and to serve the public. Many of the disparaging comments made over the last several weeks belittle their fine work and commitment. I see no evidence that the Department is "floundering" or that the dedicated public servants who staff the Department and the United States Attorneys’ offices around the country have stopped doing their jobs.

The Chairman has noticed another hearing for Department of Justice nominees next week, although he has yet to specify who will be included at that hearing, which is less than a week away. Democrats on the Committee are continuing to work expeditiously and cooperatively to consider, report and confirm the vast majority of the President’s nominations to the Department of Justice.

####