Patrick Leahy

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. I yield the floor, and I thank the distinguished Senator from California for giving me this time.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I know the distinguished Senator from Louisiana has the majority of votes in this body for the Keystone Pipeline, and that is a compliment to her hard work in getting from a minority of votes to a majority of votes. I will not be one of them, as she knows, because I represent what is the view of my fellow constituents in Vermont. I strongly oppose the fast-tracking of this process. This pipeline poses considerable safety and environmental risks here in the United States, and it threatens the natural landscapes that are in the heartland of America. We feel this pipeline is one of the most striking examples of the unquenchable thirst for oil that is destroying our environment. We feel that destruction is going to move forward unless and until we get a comprehensive national energy plan. This pipeline will not lead us towards that. It leads us to an energy policy of the past instead of a sustainable energy future, while simultaneously accelerating our impact on the climate. These tar sands require an energy-intensive process, complete with pollutants and harmful emissions to get them out of the ground, to extract them, and to refine them. We should not rubberstamp a project like this that poses such serious risks to the Nation's and the world's environment, and to our communities' safety. I was astounded by the fact that in its first year of operation the existing Keystone Pipeline--billed as you recall as the safest pipeline in history when it was built just a few years ago in 2010--spilled 12 times in its first year of operation. That is more than any other pipeline in U.S. history. The worrisome part about these spills is that tar sands oil is harder to clean up. Ask the communities along the Kalamazoo River in Michigan. It has cost more than $1 billion so far--$1 billion so far--to clean up a tar sands spill in 2010. Now, more than 4 years later, it is still a mess, and landowners continue to wait for help in restoring their property and to rebuild the ravaged pipeline. We do not need more empty assurances from the oil industry. Before the Valdez spill in Alaska, Exxon executives told us their oil tankers were safe. We heard similar promises from BP, which insisted that it could handle an oil spill in a deep-water drilling operation. The images from both of those spills are still fresh in our memories. I realize that proponents argue that this pipeline will create jobs and will help our energy security here in the United States. But this pipeline will bypass refineries in the Midwest instead of heading to American gas stations to help lower the price of gas here at home. It will head straight for the coast so the oil can be used in export markets, pumped onto ships headed for China. That may be good news for the Chinese, but it is not good news for the American people who are stuck with the safety risks, the health challenges, future environmental disasters, and the rapid acceleration of our contribution to climate change. These facts are clear: The Keystone pipeline significantly worsens the problem of carbon pollution, and it is not in our national interest. The Presidential Permit should be denied, not fast-tracked by Congress here today. So I will not be among the majority who will vote for it today. USA Freedom Act On another matter, while I have the floor, the distinguished Republican leader spoke against the USA FREEDOM Act earlier this morning. Unfortunately, he was too busy to respond to a couple of simple questions, even though he was asked to. But I would note that last year, Americans learned that section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act had been secretly interpreted for years to allow the bulk collection of telephone records. Unlike the comments made earlier that there were no hearings on this, the USA FREEDOM Act of 2014 came about after numerous congressional hearings, including six--six--public hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee. At least two panels of independent experts have concluded that the bulk collection program has not been essential or even a key part of keeping our country safe. We now have wide bipartisan agreement in the Senate and the House that the bulk phone records collection program is not essential, it violates Americans' privacy, and it has to end. So the question before Congress is not whether to end the program, but when and how. The USA FREEDOM Act of 2014 ends the NSA's bulk collection program, but does so responsibly. The bill contains key reforms to safeguard Americans' privacy by prohibiting the indiscriminate collection of their data. It also provides for greater accountability and transparency of the government's surveillance programs, and it improves the FISA Court. The bill also ensures that the intelligence community has the tools it needs to keep our country safe. This legislation is the result of several months of intense discussions and deliberations with the intelligence community and stakeholders across the political and economic spectrum. It has the unprecedented support of the Director of National Intelligence, the Attorney General, American technology companies, and privacy and civil liberty groups ranging from the ACLU and EEF to the NRA and TechFreedom, as well as the Director of NSA and lawmakers from all parts of the political spectrum who support it. We cannot afford to delay action on these reforms any longer, as the American people continue to demand stronger protections for their privacy. Unfortunately, some would rather use scare tactics than legislate. Some would have us wait while American businesses continue to lose tens of billions of dollars in the international marketplace. Or we could even wait until we are facing down the expiration of Section 215 in a matter of months, thereby creating dangerous uncertainty and risk for the intelligence community. The American people have had enough delay; they want action and real reform. It is time to get back to work, to show leadership, and to govern this country responsibly. The USA FREEDOM Act of 2014 is an opportunity to do just that. Let us get it done now, when it can be done. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record several letters and editorials in support of the USA FREEDOM Act of 2014.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I yield my time to the two Senators from Georgia.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I would ask for order. We still don't have order in the Chamber.

Mr. LEAHY. We have confirmed three judges from Georgia and I want to compliment the two Senators from Georgia for their hard work, both in the Judiciary Committee and the White House. And in that, I am sorry they had to wait so long. On this side of the aisle we cleared every one of those for a voice vote months ago. I am sorry that your side wanted to delay it, but I see a 100-0 vote, and the voice votes are accurate. But I compliment the two Senators from Georgia for sticking with their nominees. Madam President, I would like to yield to the distinguished Senator from Utah, Senator Lee, for 4 minutes.

Mr. LEAHY. I thank the junior Senator from Utah who has worked so hard on this. It has been more than a year since Americans first learned that the government had been secretly sweeping up the telephone records of innocent Americans, regardless of whether there was any connection whatsoever to terrorism or criminal activity. I introduced the original USA FREEDOM Act last October with Republican Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner, and the Senate Judiciary Committee held six public hearings to address these issues. During those hearings, we learned that the bulk phone records collection program had not, as previously advertised, thwarted 54 terrorist plots, or even dozens, or even a few. In fact, we learned through our public hearings that after all the talk about why we needed this program, we learned that the number was maybe one. That is an important fact for these who argue that the NSA's bulk phone records program is somehow essential to our fight against ISIL or other terrorists. It did nothing to stop ISIL from starting in the first place. Our bill protects Americans. It enhances privacy protections and ends indiscriminate data collection by the NSA, but also keeps the essential tools our intelligence community needs to protect our Nation. That is the simple truth and important to remember. That is why our intelligence community strongly supports this bill. As someone who worked in law enforcement, and as a native of Vermont where the right of privacy is cherished, I know we can have both liberty and security. The USA FREEDOM Act provides for commonsense reforms to government surveillance, and promotes greater accountability and transparency of the government's surveillance programs, and it improves the FISA Court. This is a carefully crafted bill that builds on the work of the House of Representatives. It has the unprecedented support of the Director of National Intelligence, the Attorney General, the Director of the NSA, American technology companies, and privacy and civil liberties groups across the political spectrum, ranging from the ACLU and EFF to the NRA and TechFreedom. Lawmakers from all parts of the political spectrum, from the right to left, support the USA FREEDOM Act. They know it is a reasonable and responsible compromise. There is no reason why we should not proceed to a debate on this important bill. I understand that there are some Members who want votes on parts of it, and that is fine. Let's have the votes. Let's not block this bill and say: Well, we want something better. That means you don't vote yes, you don't vote no, you vote maybe. Let's have some relevant amendments, and let's vote on them. Don't let this get bogged down in procedural nonsense that the American public hates. Senators should allow us to get onto this bill and help us reach an agreement on a limited list of germane amendments to be considered. Let's have germane amendments and vote them up or down. If we work together, we can finish the bill by the end of the week. We cannot afford to delay action on these reforms until next year. As both the ACLU and the NRA pointed out yesterday in a joint op-ed in the Washington Times, ``every day that the Senate fails to vote on these reforms is a day in which law-abiding citizens have reason to fear that the constitutional protections so dear to the Founders and so crucial to the functioning of a free society no longer apply.'' I echoed the words we heard from the Senator from Utah. Every day that we fail to act is another day that American businesses are harmed. One conservative think tank estimated that the ``mistrust engendered by the NSA's programs could cost the U.S. technology industry between $35 billion and $180 billion over the next three years.'' That is a staggering amount. Senators should listen to the intelligence community professionals who protect our nation every day, and who are calling for swift passage of this bill. Ask the Director of National Intelligence. Ask the Attorney General. They will tell you that it is better for our national security, and better for our fight against terrorism if we pass the USA FREEDOM Act. This is a reasonable compromise that all Senators should support, and I thank the Majority Leader for bringing this bill to the floor. And I thank Senators Dean Heller, Mike Lee, Dick Durbin, Al Franken, and Richard Blumenthal for their steadfast work on this bill. Our bill is good for privacy and civil liberties, and upholds our Constitution. It is good for American business. It is good for national security. And most importantly, it is the right thing to do on behalf of Vermonters and the rest of the American people. I urge all Senators to vote in favor of the cloture motion pending before us. I ask unanimous consent that the Statement of Administration Policy in support of the USA FREEDOM Act be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY. I yield the floor.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, this program does not gut it; it actually enhances it. Secondly, if this was important to stop ISIL, ISIL never would have started. The fact is that we had this program way beyond anything anybody is talking about today, and it didn't slow up or eliminate ISIL one iota. That is a straw man which we should not even have here. It has no effect on that, and everybody who has read the intelligence knows that. I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Connecticut.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I will not object. I was going to yield the remainder of my time to the Senator from Texas, Mr. Cruz, and I ask unanimous consent that he be allowed up to 4 minutes.

Mr. LEAHY. I will not object to the request, and I will yield the remainder of my time to the Senator from Texas. I am sorry the Senator from Georgia would not offer me the courtesy.

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, obviously I am disappointed by tonight's vote, but I am not new to this fight. We have had six public hearings on this issue. We heard interesting testimony by the head of the NSA who talked about 50-some-odd terrorist activities that have been thwarted by the bulk collection program. When he had to testify in public, it came down to possibly one. I mention that because people asked whether we had hearings. We had six. But the reason I say I am not new to this fight is the very first vote I cast as a Senator in 1975 was in favor of the Senate resolution that created the Church Committee. I have worked ever since to ensure strong oversight of surveillance authorities. We found in the Church Committee that administrations of both parties had so badly misused the tools they had in the intelligence community. We tried to put in restrictions that would balance our constitutional rights and the security that we needed as Americans. We tried to do that. I think we did. That is why over the past decade I have consistently opposed expanding the USA PATRIOT Act and FISA Amendments Act sunsets without including meaningful reforms. The first sunsets were put in place by the Republican leader in the House, Dick Armey, a conservative Republican, and myself in the Senate. We joined together for the same reason: If you do not have an ability to look at these issues on a periodic basis, then they will get out of hand. I fought the status quo every step of the way in these efforts. The broad coalition of those in favor of the USA FREEDOM Act shows we are gaining ground. While I am critical of those Republicans who failed to answer the call of the American people who elected them to stand up and work across the aisle, those who reverted to scare tactics rather than working productively to protect America's basic privacy rights and our national security--I acknowledge the hard work and principled stance of several Republicans: Senator Heller, Senator Lee, and Senator Cruz, as well as other Republicans in the other body, including my initial partner in this effort, Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner. There have also been two important partners on the Democratic side in this reform effort: Senators Franken and Blumenthal who worked with me on transparency and the FISA Court reforms. We Vermonters fight to protect our privacy rights. Every Vermonter does. They mean a great deal to us. Every Vermonter feels that way, and this lifelong Vermonter will not give up the fight. I owe that to the Vermonters I serve and to the Constitution I swore an oath to defend. I would say to those both in this Chamber and outside who approached this issue by fomenting fear, fomenting fear stifles serious debate and constructive solutions, like the carefully drawn reforms in this bill. Doing it at the last minute is all the more regrettable. This Nation deserves more than that. This Nation should not allow our liberties to be set aside by passing fears. America will always face the threat of terrorist attacks, both outside our borders and inside. We didn't do away with all our civil liberties after the Oklahoma City bombing. It was an American who did that, somebody who served in our military, churchgoing, and so forth. No more should we do it if the attacks come from outside our country. We talk about 9/11. We had all the evidence necessary to stop 9/11 before it happened. Everybody who has looked at that now agrees that if we had bothered to translate the material we had, if we had bothered to listen to people in Minnesota who tried to warn us about it, we could have stopped it. But because mistakes were made then, let's not take away the liberties of 325 million Americans. I felt this way when I was a prosecutor. We even had people escape from prison with the intent to kill me. I said: OK. We will get them, but we will follow the law in doing it, and we did. Mr. President, 13 years ago this week a letter was sent to me. The anthrax in it was so deadly that the one person who touched the envelope--that I was supposed to open--died. They died from it. We still haven't caught all of the people involved. But notwithstanding that, when people came to me and said: Well, maybe we should do away with some of our search and seizure laws, maybe we should do way with some of our laws for wiretaps, after all somebody tried to kill you. And if you had touched that envelope you would have died. I said: No, this is more than one Senator, more than one person, more than one individual. This is the Constitution of the United States. If we, 100 Members of this body, do not protect our Constitution, we do not protect our country, and we do not deserve to be in this body. I will continue to fight, and whatever years I have left in this body, I will continue to fight to preserve our Constitution and our rights as Americans. I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, Katherine Paterson is a treasure to Vermont. She is also a close friend to Marcelle and me. And today, at the age of 82, she continues to write with the grace and talent that has made her a two-time National Book Award winner and twice a Newbery medalist. I have had the honor and good fortune to know Katherine for many years. Her humble and soft-spoken nature belie the power of her writing and her myriad contributions to children's literature. In announcing that she would be last year's winner of the Laura Ingalls Wilder Medal, the committee noted: ``Katherine Paterson has been writing books that have made a profound difference in children's lives for 40 years. Her work acknowledges life's challenges and difficulties, yet she always leaves her readers with hope.'' I ask that this recent profile of Katherine Paterson, from the Burlington Free Press, be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, Christ the King School of Burlington, VT, will soon celebrate its 75th anniversary, and it remains one of the most distinguished educational hubs in the Green Mountain State. Begun as a school to accommodate the overflow of students from the Cathedral School, three-quarters of a century later it continues to offer young Vermont students the educational foundation on which to build successful futures. The school has undergone a considerable transformation since it opened its doors to the community of Burlington and beyond in 1940, but its commitment to education has been constant. Its curriculum helps students experience learning through real-world experiences. Recently, students traveled to Ausable Chasm in New York. Students, their teachers, and many parents hiked the chasm, collecting foliage for a future science lab where students will use paper chromatography to separate the components in leaves. By giving students opportunities to take their learning outside of the classroom, they early on come to understand the importance of engaging with the surrounding community. In addition to expanding their curriculum to include this experiential learning, Christ the King School's recent partnership with the Tarrant Institute for Innovative Education at the University of Vermont will help give students access to technology and professional development resources that might not otherwise be available. Christ the King School has a long history of commitment to excellence in education. I commended the School in the Record as the school celebrated its 50th anniversary, and I am pleased to again commemorate another milestone. Our young people deserve the best in their educational development. Christ the King School continues to provide the academic and spiritual guidance it has delivered for the last 75 years, and I hope will do so for decades to come.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Would the Republican leader yield for a question? The minority leader will not yield for a question, but I would note, based on his concerns about the bipartisan piece of legislation regarding the NSA and others and his concern about ISIL--which we all share--that the NSA and all of our intelligence community had every single tool the Republican leader advocates for, while ISIL built up its strength, while ISIL had Iraq's army flee from them while they went forward. With every single one of those elements the Republican leader advocates for, there was not one single alarm bell that rang. So let's deal with the facts and not hypotheses.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, as long as I have served in the Senate--and I have served the longest in this body--I have never seen a time when noncontroversial nominations were being held up, whether we have had a Republican or Democratic President. I would note for the majority leader that we have on the calendar 18 nominees for Federal judgeships that passed unanimously. Every Republican and every Democrat in the Judiciary Committee voted for them. Many of them were recommended by Republican Senators and four of them for judicial emergencies. The oldest one has been pending since June, having gone through the committee unanimously. This is not being responsible to the American people. The distinguished majority leader talked about the use of Executive orders. Concerns have been expressed by the other side about Executive orders on immigration. I would remind everybody that this body by a 2- to-1 margin--Republicans and Democrats joined together last year to pass a comprehensive immigration bill which covered everything from the people on the borders to those who were already in this country. The Republican leadership in the House has refused to take it up. They complain about the President 1\1/2\ years later--during all this time that has passed between the Republican and Democratic votes here, they have refused to take it up. Yet they complain that the President is going to do something. I say bring it up and vote yes or vote no. Stop this ``we will vote maybe.''

Mr. LEAHY. Will the distinguished majority leader yield for an observation?

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. I do.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to yield back all time.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I yield back time on this side.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today we will vote to end Republican filibusters on three district court nominations for Georgia, two of which are judicial emergency vacancies. The Senate should not need to waste our time jumping through these procedural hurdles to confirm nominees who are strongly supported by two Republican home State Senators. After we vote to invoke cloture and confirm these three nominees, we will still have 17 judicial nominees pending on the Executive Calendar--11 to serve on district courts and 6 to serve on the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. Another nine judicial nominees will be recommended by the Judiciary Committee this Thursday. By the end of the week, there will be 26 nominees reported favorably by the Judiciary Committee pending before the full Senate. All but a few of these nominees will have been reported unanimously and several are from States with at least one and sometimes two Republican home State Senators, including: Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Missouri, Illinois, and Texas. These nominees should all be confirmed before we recess in December. As I mentioned last week, I hope that Senate Republicans will work with Senate Democrats to ``clear the decks'' on pending business before the end of the 113th Congress, as the incoming majority leader has suggested. So let us work together as we have in past lameduck sessions to get these nominees confirmed and serving their communities. In 2002, after the midterm elections, Senate Democrats worked to confirm all 20 of President Bush's judicial nominees pending on the Executive Calendar all but one by voice vote. In the 2006 lameduck session, after Senate Democrats won the majority in the elections, Democrats agreed to confirm all 14 of President Bush's judicial nominations pending on the Executive Calendar, but this package was blocked by a Republican Senator. In the most recent lameduck sessions, in 2010 and 2012, a total of 32 judicial nominees were confirmed. We should do the same now. Leslie Abrams is nominated to fill a vacancy in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. She is currently an assistant U.S. attorney in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Georgia. Prior to becoming an assistant U.S. attorney, she was in private practice at two nationally known law firms. After graduating from Yale Law School, Ms. Abrams served as a law clerk to Judge Marvin J. Garbis on the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. Mark Cohen is nominated to fill an emergency vacancy in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. He has extensive experience, having practiced for over 30 years in both the public and private sectors. Currently a partner at the law firm Troutman Sanders, Mr. Cohen has also served as counsel to former Georgia Governor, Zell Miller, and spent part of his legal career at the Georgia office of the attorney general. Eleanor Ross is nominated to fill an emergency vacancy in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. She currently serves as a State court judge in DeKalb County, where she has presided over hundreds of cases dealing with both civil and criminal matters. Prior to becoming a judge, she served in various capacities as both a State and Federal prosecutor for over a decade. Throughout her legal career, she has tried over 150 cases to verdict. All three of these nominees have the strong support of their Republican home State Senators, Senator Chambliss and Senator Isakson. All three were also reported unanimously from the Judiciary Committee 5 months ago by voice vote. If confirmed, Leslie Abrams and Eleanor Ross will be the first African-American women to ever serve as Federal judges in the State of Georgia. This historic moment is long overdue. In the few remaining days of this Congress, I hope that the Republican Senators who recommended many of the pending judicial nominees to the President will work within their caucus to get consent to confirm nominees to their own home States. I hope that all Senators will vote to end the filibuster of these nominations today and confirm them.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, as another polar vortex bears down on States across the country this week, we must consider how the dropping temperatures across the Nation will impact those who do not have refuge from the cold. The issue of homelessness is especially urgent in places like my home State of Vermont. For those of us lucky enough to have warm homes, winter brings a magical beauty. But for those without shelter, the cold nights can be deadly. Unfortunately, for homeless teens, winter can also mean even greater vulnerability to being victimized by human traffickers. That is why we must pass the Leahy-Collins Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act today. This should be unanimous. We are talking about helping homeless children and victims of human trafficking. There is no good reason to oppose this measure. The programs supported by the Runaway and Homeless Youth Program provide essential resources to homeless children who need our help. Amanda, for example, is an 18-year-old living in Bellows Falls, VT, and participating in the Transitional Living Program at the Youth Services of Windham County. Amanda's mother gave her and her four siblings up for adoption when she was 2. When she was 13, her adoptive mother died of a stroke. Amanda was devastated, suffered academically, and eventually dropped out of school, then struggled with substance abuse and became homeless. Fortunately, Amanda was connected with the Youth Services of Windham County and has turned her life around. She is sober, she is on track to graduate from high school, and she has a job. Amanda says of her youth worker Danielle, ``She is part of the reason why I try to keep doing so good . . . Without her, I wouldn't have what I have today.'' Funds authorized by this bill made Amanda's transformation possible. Once headed for a life of dependency, she is now poised to become a successful and contributing young adult. There are currently 1.6 million homeless teens in this country like Amanda, and they need us to do our job and pass this bill. This bill reauthorizes critical outreach and emergency shelter services that have provided lifesaving support for the last 40 years. It takes historic steps to address the growing population of homeless LGBT youth by ensuring that no young person is denied services based on sexual orientation or gender identity. It also addresses new dangers that our young people face, like sexual exploitation and human trafficking, which urgently require our attention. Human trafficking is a growing problem in the United States, and traffickers prey upon our weakest young people, especially those in need of money or shelter. Too often, homeless children become trapped in devastating cycles of abuse and exploitation. Runaway and homeless youth service providers are our first line of defense. This bill makes sure they are trained to identify victims of sexual exploitation and trafficking, so they can help victims become survivors. After this bill was first introduced in July, it was considered by the Judiciary Committee and was voted out in September with strong bipartisan support. We had bipartisan input on the legislation, including from Senator Cornyn, who offered an amendment that included nearly every provision of his Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act. This amendment gives law enforcement new tools to combat human trafficking and provides expanded support for victims of sexual exploitation. Working across the aisle to enhance this bill and get it passed reminds me of the way both Houses of Congress came together to pass the Leahy-Crapo Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act just last year. Domestic violence, like youth homelessness, is not new. However, the challenges faced by victims are constantly changing, and we must be responsive to the needs of our most vulnerable citizens. We cannot become complacent in the face of suffering. We need to pass this bill. I thank Senator Collins for working with me on this legislation and for joining me as an original cosponsor. I ask for the support of every Senator to pass the Leahy-Collins Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act. The American people expect it, and our humanity demands it.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I yield my time to the Senator from Georgia, Mr. Chambliss.

Mr. LEAHY

Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, as we return from recess for the remaining days of the 113th Congress, I begin by congratulating my friend Senator Chuck Grassley who will become chairman of the Judiciary Committee beginning in the 114th Congress. We have a very good working relationship, and I hope this will continue when he assumes the chairmanship in January. We still have several weeks left in this Congress with much work left to be done. As history shows, when both sides work together, the lameduck session can be a productive one for filling vacancies on our courts. In 2002, after the midterm elections, Senate Democrats worked to confirm 20 of President Bush's judicial nominees--all but one by voice vote. In the 2006 lameduck session, after Senate Democrats won the majority in the elections, Democrats agreed to confirm the 14 judicial nominations pending on the floor, but this package was blocked by a Republican Senator. In the most recent lameduck sessions, in 2010 and 2012, a total of 32 judicial nominees were confirmed. With the 2014 midterm elections behind us, I hope we will, as the incoming majority leader suggests, ``clear the decks'' on pending business so that we can start fresh next year. Currently, there are 16 district court nominations that have been pending before the full Senate for months and another eight district court nominations and one Court of International Trade nomination that will be reported out of the Judiciary Committee before the end of the month. There are also six nominees pending before the Senate to fill vacancies on the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, two nominees to fill vacancies on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, and three nominees to fill vacancies on the U.S. Tax Court. Today, we will vote to overcome the needless filibuster of just two of the district court nominations that have been pending before the full Senate since June, one of which will fill a judicial emergency vacancy in Georgia. Randolph Moss is nominated to serve on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary unanimously rated Mr. Moss ``well qualified'' to serve on that court--its highest rating. Since 2001, he has been a partner at the law firm of Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale and Dorr LLP. He has also served in various capacities for the U.S. Department of Justice. Upon graduating from Yale Law School, Mr. Moss clerked for Judge Pierre N. Leval on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and for Justice John Paul Stevens on the U.S. Supreme Court. Leigh May is nominated to serve on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. She is currently a partner at the law firm of Butler, Wooten & Fryhofer, LLP, in Atlanta, GA, where she has practiced since 2000. After graduating magna cum laude from the University of Georgia Law School, she served as a law clerk to the Honorable Judge Dudley H. Bowen, Jr., of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia. We still have much work to do to fill the 64 current judicial vacancies and 27 known upcoming vacancies on our Federal district and circuit courts. Before the end of this Congress we could cut the number of vacancies on our district and circuit courts by one-third. To get this done, however, we must stop delaying for delay's sake votes for consensus nominees. Unless there is cooperation from Republican Senators, we will not have time to clear the Executive Calendar before adjournment. At the very least, I would hope that the Republican Senators who recommended many of the pending judicial nominees to the President will work within their caucus to get consent to confirm their nominees. I hope all Senators will vote to put an end to the filibuster of these nominations.