Jeff Sessions

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. I remember a conservative group demanded of Senator Hatch, with regard to Clinton nominees, that he sign a Hatch pledge. I ask the Senator how he handled outside conservative pressure groups at that time?

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 219, S. 481.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I wish to say a few words about legislation that just cleared the House. It is something I think is healthy and good. It is the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003. I worked with Senator Kennedy to hammer out legislation that I think is important. We have different political philosophies, but we have come together on this issue. Also, in the House, Congressmen Frank Wolf and Bobby Scott worked together to move the legislation through their body. As a Federal prosecutor for 15 years and as an attorney general for Alabama, I sent many guilty criminals to prison where they belong. I believe they should be treated fairly in court, and I treated them fairly. I also believe they should be treated fairly in prison. Most prison wardens and sheriffs are outstanding public servants. They do a fine job of supervising inmates, and I respect them and commend them for the work they do. However, knowingly subjecting a prisoner to a circumstance where they could be sexually assaulted, and raped, is cruel and unusual punishment, clearly, under the eighth amendment to the Constitution. Some States have estimated as many as 10 percent or more convicted offenders have been subject to sexual assault in prison. One study said 13 percent and another study said 14 percent. I hope these statistics are an exaggeration and frankly, I think they may be an exaggeration. Nonetheless, it is the duty of government officials to ensure that criminals who are convicted and sentenced to prison, serve the sentence imposed by the judge, but not additional sentence of sexual assault. Rape is not a part of any lawful sentence. I am also concerned when I see television programs, movies, and read books that constantly suggest that any young person sent to prison is going to be sexually assaulted. I have never believed that to be true, but I have not doubted some of it occurs. None of it should occur. As a prosecutor, I had a policy that I would talk to any mother or close family member of any person who was convicted in my court. Many of them told me of their concerns about sexual assault in prison based on what they had seen on television and what they had read in books. This bill will deal with the issue in three ways. It establishes a national commission to study prison rape at the Federal, State, and local levels and, after 2 years, to publish the results of the study and make recommendations on how to reduce prison rape. Second, the bill directs the Attorney General to issue a rule for the reduction of prison rape in Federal prisons. That is what we have direct responsibility for in this body, Federal prisons. To avoid a reduction in certain Federal funds, each State should certify it has adopted or is in compliance with the standards set forth in the Attorney General's rules for improvement in this area. If a State is not in compliance, it can use the 5-percent money that they would otherwise lose to work on this problem. If they do that, they will not end up losing any money, but it will be a way of us saying: If you are going to continue to draw Federal money, take this issue seriously. Third, the bill will require the Department of Justice to conduct statistical surveys on prison rape for Federal, State, and local prisons and jails. Further, the Federal Government will select officials in prisons with the highest incidence of prison rape and with the lowest incidence of sexual assaults and have them come to Washington to discuss the problem and testify. The bill provides grants of up to $40 million to States for the prevention, investigation, and prosecution of prison rape. We find very little prosecution of these cases for prison rape. It will help the States reduce repeat offenses. A broad and bipartisan array of organizations and institutions have added their support to this bill; for example: The American Psychological Association; Camp Fire USA; Center for Religious Freedom, Freedom House; Christian Rescue Committee; Citizens United for Rehabilitation; Focus on the Family; Good News, United Methodist Church; Human Rights Watch; Justice Policy Institute; Lutheran Office for Governmental Affairs; National Association of School Psychologists; National Association of Evangelicals; National Association for the Advancement of Colored People; National Council for La Raza; National Network for Youth; National Mental Health Association; Marvin Olasky, the author and editor; Partnership for Responsible Drug Information, Presbyterian Church USA; Religious Action Center; Prison Fellowship-- that is Chuck Colson's group that has been active in working on this issue--the Salvation Army; the Southern Baptist Convention; Unitarian Universalists for Juvenile Justice; Volunteers of America; and Youth Law Center. I also thank Linda Chavez and Mike Horowitz for the ideas that started this legislative initiative. Well-conceived and carefully crafted ideas drive many legislative and political initiatives that become law after people work together to form a bipartisan, moral position. I commend the hard work of Bill Pryor, the attorney general of Alabama, who worked with us on this issue and testified in favor of it. He cares about the individuals who are in prison, having put a lot of them there himself, and he demands fairness in how the prisoners are treated. I also compliment my Senate staff person, Andrea Sander, for her excellent work in this matter. This bill will address prison rape, not through unfunded mandates but by studying the problem and figuring out how to address these needs. It is time for us to confront this issue, to deal with it, and put it behind us. Mothers should not have to worry that their children are going to be sexually assaulted in prison. That should not occur. I believe we can do better. This bill will be a major step in that direction, and I salute Senator Kennedy for his leadership in helping us make this happen. I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period for morning business.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, in concurrence with the Democratic leader, the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 2738 and H.R. 2739 en bloc, with the following conditions for debate only: Grassley, 50 minutes; Baucus, 45 minutes; Hollings, 60 minutes; Daschle, 30 minutes; Jeffords, 60 minutes; Sessions, 45 minutes; Hatch, 15 minutes; Cornyn, 15 minutes.

Mr. SESSIONS. I further ask that upon the use or yielding back of time, the bills be read a third time and the Senate then immediately proceed to a Senate resolution regarding immigration provisions included in the Singapore and Chile free-trade agreements; the resolution then be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; provided further that the Senate then proceed to a vote on passage of the Singapore free-trade agreement, followed by a vote on passage of the Chile free-trade agreement, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I withdraw the unanimous consent request for the time being.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I now send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session for the consideration of Executive Calendar No. 21, the Estrada nomination.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the live quorum provided for in rule XXII be waived and the Senate resume legislative session.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 203 submitted earlier today by Senators Lugar, Bayh, Frist, Daschle, and others.

Mr. SESSIONS. I join in expressing my sympathies to the family of former Senator Vance Hartke. He is known throughout this country and served this country with great distinction. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution and preamble be agreed to en bloc, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements appear at the appropriate place in the Record, without intervening action or debate.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. I further ask consent that notwithstanding the provisions of rule XXII, at 11:15 there will be 1 hour of debate equally divided between Senators Hatch and Leahy, or their designees, and that at 12:15 the Senate proceed to the vote on invoking cloture on the Owen nomination. I further ask consent that the Senate recess following that vote until 2:15 p.m. for the weekly party lunches.

Mr. SESSIONS. On behalf of the majority leader, I advise all Senators that the Senate will resume consideration of S. 14, the Energy bill. It is the majority leader's hope to dispose of the two pending CAFE amendments tomorrow morning. In addition, the Senate will conduct its third cloture vote on the Owen nomination for the Fifth Circuit tomorrow at 12:15. Therefore, Senators should expect the possibility of several votes prior to the party lunches. Members will be notified when the first vote is scheduled. For the remainder of the day, the Senate will continue debate on the Energy bill. The Senate may also begin consideration of the Chile and Singapore trade agreement bills tomorrow. Therefore, Senators should expect votes throughout the afternoon and into the evening tomorrow.

Mr. SESSIONS. As I understand the agreement and the majority leader's position, it is his hope to dispose of those two CAFE amendments tomorrow morning. I would think the Senator is correct.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate recess under the provisions of S. Res. 203, as a further mark of respect to our distinguished and late former colleague, Senator Vance Hartke.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in recess until 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, July 29. I further ask that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate then resume consideration of S. 14, the Energy bill.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I wish to bring my colleagues up to speed on the nomination of Attorney General Bill Pryor from the State of Alabama for U.S. District Court for the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Bill Pryor is an extraordinary nominee, one of the finest, most decent, most intelligent, and most ethical individuals I have ever had the pleasure of knowing. His reputation throughout the State of Alabama is extraordinary. His career as a lawyer is extraordinary. He would make a magnificent judge on the court of appeals. Bill grew up in Mobile, AL. He attended the Catholic school there, McGill-Toolen. His father was band director there. They were active in their church. They are the kind of family we ought to emulate and lift up and be proud of. I have heard it said that Mr. Pryor was a John Kennedy Democrat in the 1960s. After some of the problems we have had, he probably has changed some of his views about his politics in the last few days. But he is a remarkable man, and his mother and family are remarkable. Bill went to Tulane Law School, one of America's great law schools. He worked very hard. He finished at the top of his class. He was the editor in chief of the Tulane Law Review. The most prestigious position a graduating law senior can have is to be the editor of the law review for the law school. It is a quite an honor. He clerked after that for Judge John Minor Wisdom, one of the great justices on the old Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Wisdom has been known as a champion of civil rights in the South. He was one of those judges on the court of appeals during the time of the end of segregation and the movement toward integration. It was not easy. The court was constantly in the arena, whether they wanted to be there or not. Judge Wisdom has been recognized by all as being a champion in that area. Bill Pryor is a man of religious faith. He attends church regularly. His wife and children do so. He is a Catholic, and he believes in the doctrine of the church. It seems that some of those beliefs he shares with millions of Americans and millions of people throughout the world have caused some of the difficulties he has had. He helped me. When I was attorney general of Alabama, I put him in charge of appellate litigation and constitutional litigation. He wrote briefs to the court of appeals. He argued those cases personally. He had already been with two of Alabama's best law firms before he agreed to join me, giving up a very lucrative law career. The firms wanted him to stay. He was in a position to be partner and make a great deal of money. But he believed in public service. He and his wife talked about it. They agreed to come to work. After I was elected to the Senate 2 years later, Governor James, then Republican Governor of Alabama, appointed Bill to be my successor as attorney general. In that position, he has stood courageously for the values he believes in. He has done so with clarity and conviction, winning the confidence and respect of people throughout the State, even those who are of a different political party and race. For example, when he was sworn in, he said in his inaugural address: ``The constitution and laws of this State should have not one thing in them that would discriminate against a person because of their race.'' We had in our Alabama Constitution an old amendment that said interracial marriages were banned. That had been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, but Bill thought it ought not to be in there. He joined with State Representative Alvin Holmes who worked on the team of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., during those very tough days of civil rights. Together they led the battle, and the people of Alabama removed that amendment from the constitution. Alvin Holmes said: No other politician in Alabama, Republican or Democrat, White politician, supported me in that effort but Bill Pryor. He wrote one of the most powerful, moving letters anybody would ever want to see explaining the character of Bill Pryor and why he should be a Federal judge. Along that line, Mr. Joe Reed, Representative Joe Reed, Dr. Joe Reed, who is the vice chairman of the Alabama teachers union, the AEA, a member of the Democratic National Committee, who has chaired for 30 years the Alabama Democratic Conference, a powerful force in Alabama-- there is nobody who has run for the Democratic nomination for President in these United States who does not know Dr. Joe Reed. He is the first person they would want to talk to as they consider how to be involved in winning a primary in Alabama. Dr. Reed supports him strongly. Congressman Artur Davis, a Harvard Law graduate, former assistant U.S. attorney, African American, supports Bill Pryor. The former Democratic Governor of Alabama has spoken highly of him. He has that kind of reputation. His reputation is that Bill Pryor does what is right; he follows the law, whether it is popular or not. One of the issues that was important politically in the State--and each State has issues that arise given time--was separation of church and state. The issue became very contentious. Our Republican Governor, Bob James, had a very strong view about it. He played football and he said he didn't see anything wrong with a coach leading the kids in prayer. Frankly, I don't either. But the Supreme Court has ruled to the contrary. Governor James had other very strong views. He had just appointed Bill Pryor to the attorney general office to be one of the youngest attorneys general in America. He had this idea about how these issues ought to be argued in court. But under the Alabama Constitution, the attorney general speaks for the State of Alabama in court. So they had a conversation or two, and Attorney General Pryor had to reluctantly tell the man who just appointed him, in a very hot political deal, that your position will not hold up according to the law; I cannot support that. The Governor took a very strong position on the right of school officials to speak on religious issues, and reluctantly the attorney general had to file a brief on the subject. The attorney general filed a brief and said flat out that the Governor's position did not state the legal position of the State of Alabama. He argued the case according to the precedent of the Supreme Court. He also, in that confused time, wrote a legal opinion, which he sent to every school official in the State, setting forth what children could do in the free exercise of their religious beliefs and what schools could and could not do. In fact, those rules that he sent out were adopted almost in toto by the Clinton Department of Education as their directives to policy concerning the separation of church and state in schools. He followed the law, even though it was very tough for him to do so. They have expressed real reservation about Mr. Pryor. They say he has strongly held views, that he is extreme in his pro-life views, that he is very passionate, and that he would not follow the law, basically. They have criticized him for his views on abortion. He didn't volunteer those views. But in the committee, one of the Senators looked right at him and asked him about that. He explained that he thought that taking an unborn life was immoral and that Roe v. Wade has led to the slaughter of millions of innocent unborn. You could have heard a pin drop. Nobody had really been asked that squarely. He answered it honestly. He said: But, Senator, I know the courts don't follow that view and it is not the law today, and I follow the law as it is written. In fact, he had proof of it because, previously, when he was attorney general, Alabama passed a law to ban partial abortions. That law was a broad law. Under the Supreme Court rulings and other rulings, portions of that statute were not constitutional. Attorney General Pryor, as attorney general of Alabama, had to send a directive to all the district attorneys in Alabama directing them not to enforce portions of that law that violate the Constitution of the United States. So even though he thought, no doubt, partial-birth abortion was wrong--because he believes abortion is wrong, so he would certainly believe that horrible procedure would be wrong--he was a lawyer and he spoke up and he directed, as attorney general, every district attorney in the State to enforce that law, consistent with the Constitution. I think that demonstrates clearly his ability to understand and follow the law even if he does not agree with it. The only other thing I know he has ever done with regard to abortion is to make clear that if there were a protest at an abortion clinic that violated the law and the right of people to attend that clinic, they would be prosecuted by him. He would enforce the constitutional right of people to go to clinics and have abortions under the laws of the United States. Another issue we dealt with in the State was reapportionment. Most Republicans believed strongly that reapportionment had been very adverse to their ability to have a representative in the State legislature. As a whole, the State is a majority Republican State, with both Senators, the Governor, and five of the seven Congressmen being Republicans. But the legislature is about two-thirds Democrats. A lawsuit was filed by the Republican groups to get the legislature reapportioned, hoping they would get a better shake in the numbers. It was a pretty legitimate suit. It had real merit to it. They wanted Bill Pryor to take the lead in it as attorney general. He was a Republican, after all. Some lawyers had known him for years and they had worked with him. Bill researched the law and said: You don't have standing, and this is not a legitimate lawsuit, and I cannot support it. They said: What do you mean? They called me saying I have to get Bill to change his idea and help them win. But I told them then that Bill follows the law. If you have the law, do it; if you don't, he will not help you. So he resisted their actions. He defended the Democratic position. He defended, particularly, the African-American position. He actually lost the case in the court of appeals and appealed it to the Supreme Court of the United States and won it. He was right all along. So I can give many examples of this brilliant lawyer who has stood firm for what he believes is right, who gives bipartisan, biracial support to the people in Alabama, a man who would flourish as a court of appeals judge, a man who loves America. He has sincere and great religious faith. He understands the rule of law and places all that in proper context. I am just proud of him. I am glad the committee has moved him forward. I hope we will see him confirmed as a Federal judge. I yield the floor.