U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

90–238 PDF 2004

S. Hrg. 108–292

NOMINATIONS OF DALE CABANISS, CRAIG S.

ISCOE, AND BRIAN F. HOLEMAN

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON THE

NOMINATIONS OF DALE CABANISS TO BE CHAIRMAN, FEDERAL LABOR 

RELATIONS AUTHORITY; CRAIG S. ISCOE AND BRIAN F. HOLEMAN TO 

BE ASSOCIATE JUDGES OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT 

OF COLUMBIA

SEPTEMBER 30, 2003

Printed for the use of the Committee on Governmental Affairs

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah 

PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois 

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Deleware 

MARK DAYTON, Minnesota 

FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas 

MICHAEL D. BOPP, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

JOHANNA L. HARDY, Senior Counsel 

THERESA PRYCH, Professional Staff Member, Oversight of Government Management, the 

Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia Subcommittee 

JOYCE A. RECHTSCHAFFEN, Minority Staff Director and Counsel 

MARIANNE CLIFFORD UPTON, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel, Oversight of 

Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia Subcommittee 

JENNIFER E. HAMILTON, Minority Research Assistant 

AMY B. NEWHOUSE, Chief Clerk 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Voinovich ............................................................................................. 1 

Senator Stevens ................................................................................................ 1

WITNESSES 

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2003

Hon. Dale Cabaniss to be Chairman, Federal Labor Relations Authority ......... 3

Hon. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Delegate in Congress from the District of 

Columbia ............................................................................................................... 7

Craig S. Iscoe to be an Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the District 

of Columbia ........................................................................................................... 8

Brian F. Holeman to be an Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the 

District of Columbia ............................................................................................. 8

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF WITNESSES

Cabaniss, Dale: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 3

Biographical and professional information requested of nominees .............. 15

Pre-hearing questionnaire ............................................................................... 23

Post-hearing questions and responses from Senator Voinovich ................... 47

Holeman, Brian F.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 8

Biographical and professional information requested of nominees .............. 84

Iscoe, Craig S.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 8

Biographical and professional information requested of nominees .............. 50

Norton, Hon. Eleanor Holmes: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 7

APPENDIX

Hon. Paul Strauss, U.S. Senator from the District of Columbia (Shadow), 

prepared statement .............................................................................................. 11

(1)

NOMINATIONS OF DALE CABANISS, CRAIG S. 

ISCOE, AND BRIAN F. HOLEMAN 

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2003

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:02 a.m., in room 

SD–342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. George V. Voinovich, 

presiding. 

Present: Senators Voinovich and Stevens. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR VOINOVICH 

Senator VOINOVICH. The Committee will come to order. 

Good morning, and thank you all for coming. Today, the Governmental Affairs Committee meets to discuss the nominations of Dale 

Cabaniss for Chairman of the Federal Labor Relations Authority, 

and Brian Holeman and Craig Iscoe for Associate Judges of the 

District of Columbia Superior Court. 

We are going to begin our hearing this morning with the FLRA 

nomination, and I would like to extend my greetings to Ms. 

Cabaniss and her family, and I would like to also welcome my colleague, Senator Stevens, who is going to be introducing Ms. 

Cabaniss. 

Senator Stevens, I know you are a very busy Senator, and we 

look forward to your words. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR STEVENS 

Senator STEVENS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am 

pleased to be here. I think this is the third time I have been here 

to introduce Dale Cabaniss to this Committee. 

Dale worked for our Alaska delegation, first for Senator Frank 

Murkowski, and then for me, for 13 years. She was the person who 

served as my adviser and counsel to the Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Post Office and Civil Service, and she was also an 

important member of our professional staff for the Senate Appropriations Committee on the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and 

Human Services. 

Her Alaska roots are very deep, Mr. Chairman. Her husband, 

Mitch, who is here, Mitch Rose, was my chief of staff, and Dale is 

the mother of three children: Ben, and twin girls, Haley and Shelby. Her father-in-law is one of my close friends, and I know that 

family means a lot to Dale and to Mitch. We are also pleased that 

Dale’s brother, Major Christian Cabaniss, a Marine officer, is with 

us today. 

2

Dale’s father-in-law is the former director of the Alaska Permanent Fund. Some of you may wonder about the Permanent Fund, 

but that is the fund from which we get our Alaska dividends. It is 

a very important function of our State. 

Dale is part of a public service family. Her commitment to government service is obvious, and she has a great deal of experience. 

Dale’s extensive experience goes beyond the Congress, Mr. Chairman. She was a member of the Federal Labor Relations Authority 

in several capacities. She was originally appointed a member of the 

FLRA by President Clinton in 1997 as a minority member then of 

the Board. In March 2001, she served as chairman of that agency, 

and she has been nominated now for another 5-year term as a 

member of the FLRA, and I am here this morning to strongly support her nomination and urge that she be reported to the floor. 

Dale has been an advocate of an effective bipartisan voice on civil 

service on public and private sector labor issues. She serves as a 

member of the FLRA’s three-member panel that adjudicates cases 

and makes over 1,000 decisions a year. These disputes are often 

contentious, and Dale has earned the reputation as a fair and balanced arbitrator. 

She has also had extensive experience with the Federal labormanagement relations statute and the Federal budget and appropriations process. She understands the challenges that Federal 

agencies and employees face, and her own experiences with government, both in the Congress and the Executive Branch, give her a 

unique perspective when it comes to resolving disputes that come 

before her agency. I know, and hope the Committee will agree, that 

this type of experience is valuable for all of us on the FLRA. 

Since 2001, Dale has fulfilled the role of administrative CEO for 

the entire FLRA. She has adeptly spread out her responsibilities, 

which include managing human capital, steering the agency 

through the budget and appropriations process, and dealing with 

all the issues related to agency planning and performance. 

In short, I am really happy to be here to present to you a public 

servant with a distinguished background who really deserves early 

approval by this Committee. I am pleased to serve with you on this 

and hope we can quickly move her nomination for another 5-year 

term on the FLRA. I appreciate very much your courtesy. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Thank you, Senator Stevens. I know that 

you would like to remain for the rest of the hearing, but you have 

other things to do. Again, thank you for being here. 

Senator STEVENS. I am sure we all are going to leave rather 

soon. We have two votes in just a few minutes. 

Senator VOINOVICH. I understand. 

Senator STEVENS. I thank you for your courtesy, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator VOINOVICH. You are more than welcome. 

Ms. Cabaniss, I think you know that I have a special interest in 

the Federal personnel issues and will be watching your progress as 

Chairman with great interest. Even though the FLRA is a small 

independent agency, its mission is vital to the entire Federal service system. The FLRA provides leadership, establishes policies, offers guidance relating to Federal labor-management relations. The 

FLRA also resolves disputes under and ensures compliance with 

the Federal service labor-management relations statute. 

3

1The biographical and professional information for Ms. Cabaniss appears in the Appendix on 

page 15. 

Pre-hearing questionnaire for Ms. Cabaniss appears in the Appendix on page 23. 

Post-hearing questions and responses for Ms. Cabaniss appears in the Appendix on page 47. 

As the current chairman, you have had the opportunity to gain 

an insider’s perspective on the past, present, and future of labor relations, and I would be very interested in your opinion and observations regarding the current state of Federal labor relations. I also 

look forward to hearing how you will continue to ensure that the 

Federal labor relations statute remains an integral part of our civil 

service system. 

Ms. Cabaniss, you have filed responses to a biographical and financial questionnaire, answered pre-hearing questions submitted 

by the Committee, and you have had your financial statements reviewed by the Office of Government Ethics. Without objection, this 

information will be made a part of the hearing record, with the exception of the financial data, which will be on file and available for 

public inspection at the Committee offices. 

Our Committee rules require that all witnesses at nomination 

hearings give their testimony under oath. Therefore, I ask you to 

please stand and raise your hand. 

Do you swear that the testimony that you will give before the 

Committee will be the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so 

help you, God? 

Ms. CABANISS. I do. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Let the record note that the nominee has responded in the affirmative. 

You have some family members here with you this morning, and 

I thought I would give you an opportunity to introduce those members. 

TESTIMONY OF DALE CABANISS,1 TO BE CHAIRMAN, FEDERAL 

LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY 

Ms. CABANISS. My husband, Mitch Rose, is here, as Senator Stevens mentioned, and my brother, Major Christian Cabaniss. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Well, we welcome them this morning, and I 

know they are very proud of your service, and I am sure your husband should be thanked for the sacrifice that he makes of his time 

so that you can do the job that you have been doing for our country. 

I will start with some standard questions we ask all nominees. 

Is there anything you are aware of in your background that might 

present a conflict of interest with the duties of the office to which 

you have been nominated? 

Ms. CABANISS. No. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Do you know of anything personal or otherwise that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably 

discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you have been 

nominated? 

Ms. CABANISS. No. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Do you agree without reservation to respond 

to any reasonable summons to appear and testify before any duly 

constituted Committee of Congress if you are confirmed? 

Ms. CABANISS. Yes. 

4

Senator VOINOVICH. I have some questions that I would like to 

ask, and I know we have got some votes coming up here this morning. What I am going to try and do, quite frankly, is continue this 

hearing as we move along, and then I will have to excuse myself 

to go down and then come back, and we will continue with our 

other nominees that are here this morning. 

What can you do to help the Executive Branch address its 

human capital challenges? Where I am coming from is this: That 

there is some real concern about labor relations between the administration and the members of the unions, the Federal unions. 

What role do you think you can play to help make this a better relationship? 

Ms. CABANISS. Well, I think we do things right now to help better relationships because I think all good relationships are dependent upon communication, appropriate behavior, respect for each 

other. I think we address those issues in a number of ways. 

Through the decisions of the three-member Authority decisional 

component, we try to make sure that the parties who come to us 

understand their rights and responsibilities under the statute, that 

we have well-reasoned decisions that help people not only resolve 

the particular dispute that they came to us for resolution, but they 

can take something from those decisions that can help guide their 

future behavior. 

More importantly, though, I think sometimes the best thing is for 

us to be able to help people learn how to interact with each other 

effectively before they resort to litigation. We have a lot of different 

kinds of ADR programs. We have several training programs. We do 

outreach, teaching people interest-based bargaining techniques, 

ways for parties to learn to work with each other. 

I was very happy to see the other day we got a training request 

from an agency that has had contentious contract negotiations with 

its union since the previous administration. I was very happy to 

see that they are resuming talks, and they were actually asking 

first for training before they started negotiations and trying to figure out how they could work together instead of waiting until they 

are in an adversarial stance, people have hardened their positions, 

and all they come to us to do is to decide their dispute. 

Senator VOINOVICH. So, in effect, you are reaching out. Can you 

initiate that or do they have to come to you for it? 

Ms. CABANISS. We have certain places where we offer services as 

part of our process. When people come to our General Counsel’s Office and they are seeking to file a ULP, there is outreach that is 

made there. Do you really want to go this route? Can we help you 

work on your relationship? 

When you file a negotiability appeal with the three-member Authority decisional component, we have pre-conferences with the 

parties; we offer again our services. 

In some ways, though, it is like anyone with a problem. We know 

where our high filers are, where agencies and unions have difficulties. But in some ways, the best way for these kind of services to 

work is when the parties are voluntarily coming to us and seeking 

our assistance. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Are you involved at all in the negotiations 

or provide any training for the people that are involved in negotiVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:50 Feb 27, 2004 Jkt 090238 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\90238.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PHOGAN
5

ating new personnel practices with the newly created Department 

of Homeland Security? 

Ms. CABANISS. The only involvement we’ve had in that is the design team asked for some training this summer to be provided. For 

some of our career staff to give some training on certain bargaining 

techniques. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Where do you get your——

Ms. CABANISS. That was provided. 

Senator VOINOVICH. I should know this, but where does your 

budget come from? 

Ms. CABANISS. Treasury—I was going to say Treasury, Postal. 

It’s now Transportation, Treasury. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Is it adequate? Do you have an adequate 

budget to get the job done? 

Ms. CABANISS. I think it’s sufficient. We’re fairly small. We’ve got 

approximately $30 million, 215 FTEs. But I don’t think the budget’s really so much the issue, and like I said, we have a lot of really 

talented employees who have a lot of skills that I think people 

could benefit from. But I think in a lot of ways there are systemic 

problems that I’ve seen since I’ve been a member of the Authority, 

not really particular to this administration, where you continue to 

see problems, difficult relationships in the same agencies, in the 

same facilities, over and over and over again. If we see those or we 

think it would probably be in the best interest of those agencies, 

they’ve got to know where they have problem facilities, too, to go 

in and provide training perhaps to their managers and their employees, how to more effectively manage their conflicts as opposed 

to—here we have another case again from X particular place. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Well, you have these observations, and you 

share them with the Secretaries of the Departments? 

Ms. CABANISS. To be honest, we don’t really have that role as an 

independent adjudicator. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Because I know that Clay Johnson has now 

taken over the management part of OMB. 

Ms. CABANISS. Well, I think that’s exactly the place to—I think 

in the past couple of years, this Committee has been very active 

in emphasizing the M in OMB rather than just the dollars. And I 

think probably most of that leadership role for the agencies would 

be more appropriately coming from OMB. 

Senator VOINOVICH. He seems to be very conscientious, and I like 

his attitude. He gets it. And, if it is appropriate, I think it would 

be very good if you folks could share some of your observations 

with him so that perhaps those agencies where we have had some 

real problems could get the kind of training that they need so that 

it will improve the relationships there. 

Ms. CABANISS. Well, and it’s not just training from us. I think, 

frankly, sometimes just because you make someone a manager they 

don’t automatically have that skill set. And, we have fewer managers than we used to have in the Federal Government. We’ve reduced the layers of middle management, and I think in a lot of 

ways managers are burdened with a lot of responsibilities. And I 

think when everyone’s trying to meet program needs, reach mission 

goals, I don’t know that agencies necessarily always have the time 

or the money to think, now, what do we need to do as far as trainVerDate 0ct 09 2002 12:50 Feb 27, 2004 Jkt 090238 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\90238.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PHOGAN
6

ing our managers in how to manage conflict, how to deal with 

issues before—regardless of the FLRA, the MSPB, EEOC, any formal process they might resort to, what can you do within the agencies, whether it’s in-house ADR, employee ombudsman programs, 

ways to manage conflicts before they reach the level that you’re 

coming to someone like us. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Do you have any kind of publication that 

says these are fundamentals that you ought to have? 

Ms. CABANISS. No, we haven’t done that. That is actually really 

much more, I think, MSPB’s role in the studies that they do. We 

haven’t had that responsibility under our statute. But it’s certainly 

something that we’re interested in, and we’ve tried to put out, I 

think, through our ADR services and our training conferences, to 

try and help people build relationships and understand that they’re 

in it for the long haul and that the conflict not only costs the people 

who are involved in the conflict, but the agencies and the American 

public ultimately. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Well, I’ve got some more questions, and I am 

going to submit them to you in writing. I think that we may have 

an oversight hearing one of these days with you so we can spend 

more time talking about what you do and what the relationships 

are, because I am really committed to try and improve the relationships with labor and this administration. And so often, as you have 

already pointed out, a lot of it has to do with giving the folks the 

training that they need so that they are more capable of dealing 

with some of these issues that come up. 

So thank you very much for being here, and I hope that the Committee will move your nomination very fast. Thanks very much for 

being here, and we thank your husband and your brother for showing up this morning. 

Ms. CABANISS. Thank you. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Now I would like to ask Mr. Holeman and 

Mr. Iscoe to come forward. Mr. Holeman and Mr. Iscoe are nominated to serve 15-year terms on the District of Columbia Superior 

Court. This Committee takes its oversight responsibility seriously, 

and I welcome today’s opportunity to discuss the Superior Court 

with you. 

Confirming qualified nominees to the court is critical to ensuring 

public safety in our Nation’s capital. Let me state for the record 

that Mr. Holeman and Mr. Iscoe have been subjected to a very 

thorough screening process. They were recommended for this position by the District’s Judicial Nomination Committee. They both 

have been subjected to an FBI background investigation and nominated by the President after careful scrutiny. Since the nomination 

was received, Committee staff also has conducted a separate background check and interviewed Mr. Holeman and Mr. Iscoe. 

I would now like to welcome my colleague, Eleanor Holmes Norton from the District of Columbia, who is here to offer a few words 

of introduction for our nominees. Eleanor, it is so nice to see you, 

and thank you for coming. 

7

TESTIMONY OF HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, A 

DELEGATE IN CONGRESS FROM THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Ms. NORTON. My pleasure, Mr. Chairman, and may I thank you 

again for your good works for the District of Columbia. 

The President has nominated two well-qualified candidates to be 

Association Judges of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. 

Brian Holeman has extensive experience in private practice in 

the District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Los Angeles. He has his degrees from the University of Michigan Law 

School and his bachelor’s from Princeton University. 

Craig Iscoe has spent his career as a prosecutor, a trial attorney 

with administrative agencies, and a law professor. He is now on detail from our U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia to 

the SEC, where he is conducting securities litigation. He has also 

worked as a trial attorney early in his career for the FTC. His work 

in the U.S. Attorney’s Office has been especially extensive: jury 

trials in major criminal cases, in public corruption, major transnational crimes. He has worked at Main Justice in intelligence, national security, white-collar matters. He has been in private practice here in the District of Columbia at Arent, Fox, and has been 

a clinical law professor at Vanderbilt and Georgetown Law Schools. 

We are pleased that he has worked in our local community as an 

Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner. He has his law degree from 

Stanford, his LLM from Georgetown, and he is a Phi Beta Kappa 

graduate of the University of Texas at Austin. 

We are very pleased that you are holding hearings for both these 

candidates, whom we also consider well qualified to be judges on 

our Superior Court. 

Senator VOINOVICH. As you know, you are welcome to remain for 

the rest of the hearing, but I suspect you have other appointments 

this morning. We thank you for coming over and look forward to 

seeing you again. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator VOINOVICH. As I mentioned before, it is the custom of 

this Committee to swear in all our witnesses, and, therefore, I ask 

both of you to please stand and raise your right hand. Do you 

swear the testimony you will give before this Committee will be the 

truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. ISCOE. I do. 

Mr. HOLEMAN. I do. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Let the record show they have answered in 

the affirmative. 

I understand that you may have some family members here 

today, Mr. Iscoe. I suspect that your wife and two children are behind you, if you want to introduce them. 

8

1The biographical and professional information and pre-hearing questions for Mr. Iscoe appear in the Appendix on page 50. 2The biographical and professional information and pre-hearing questions for Mr. Holeman 

appear in the Appendix on page 84. 

TESTIMONY OF CRAIG S. ISCOE,1 TO BE AN ASSOCIATE JUDGE 

OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Mr. ISCOE. Quite correct, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. I’d like to 

introduce my wife, Rosemary Hart, and my two sons, David and 

Mark. 

Senator VOINOVICH. We are very happy to have you here today, 

and I have studied your husband and your father’s resume over the 

years, and he has chosen to serve his country in various capacities 

over the years rather than opt for a large law firm and make a 

whole bunch of money. As one who has been in this business for 

almost 37 years, I admire the fact that you have been willing to 

sacrifice so that your husband and father can serve his country. 

The only comment I have is that I hope there is somebody at the 

SEC to take your place because there is some serious work that 

needs to be done by the SEC to take care of some folks that have 

not done what they are supposed to do in their corporate responsibilities. 

Mr. Holeman, do you have any family here that you would like 

to introduce? 

TESTIMONY OF BRIAN F. HOLEMAN,2 TO BE AN ASSOCIATE 

JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

Mr. HOLEMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am accompanied 

today by my wife, Susan Dunnings Holeman, who is a well-respected lawyer here in the city in her own right. She is Deputy 

General Counsel for Employee Relations with National Public 

Radio. We decided to spare the Committee our 18-month-old, Jonathan Taylor Holeman. He’s teething now, and we probably would 

not be able to get through this proceeding. 

I’d like to mention as well, Mr. Chairman, that not present but 

certainly here in spirit are my mother, Joan Holeman, and my father-in-law, Stuart John Dunnings, Jr. 

Senator VOINOVICH. We thank you also for your service. I notice 

from your background that you have had a distinguished career, 

but have chosen the private practice. As one who did that for about 

14 years, I also understand that, and you have got a very distinguished background in litigation and trial work, and we are very 

happy that you are here today. 

Mr. HOLEMAN. Thank you, sir. 

Senator VOINOVICH. I have questions that I have to ask all of 

you. First of all, is there anything that you are aware of in your 

background that might present a conflict of interest with the duties 

of the office to which you have been nominated? 

Mr. ISCOE. No, sir, there’s not. 

Mr. HOLEMAN. No, sir. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Do you know of any reason, personal or otherwise, that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you have 

been nominated? 

9

Mr. ISCOE. No, sir, I do not. 

Mr. HOLEMAN. No, sir. 

Senator VOINOVICH. And last, but not least, do you know of any 

reason, personal or otherwise, that would in any way prevent you 

from serving the full term for the office to which you have been 

nominated? 

Mr. ISCOE. No, I do not. 

Mr. HOLEMAN. No, sir. 

Senator VOINOVICH. This is a question for both of you. You both 

have had a chance to observe a variety of judicial temperaments, 

and I would like each of you to kind of discuss what you believe 

to be the appropriate temperament and approach of a judge not 

only in dealing with attorneys before you, but in dealing with clients and witnesses appearing before the bench? 

Mr. ISCOE. Mr. Chairman, I believe a judge has to be civil and 

polite at all times, and from having appeared in court, I can tell 

you that makes a difference not only to the lawyers who are appearing in front of the judge, but also to the witnesses and to the 

entire court process. 

In addition, a good judge has to be extremely well prepared to 

have done his or her homework, to have read the pleadings, not 

just well enough to have said he’s been through them, but to have 

full command of them so that at the time that the lawyers are appearing in front of the judge, the judge can ask incisive, probing 

questions. That does a couple of things: It facilitates the process, 

and it also lets the lawyers know that they should be well prepared 

and ready to argue legal and factual issues. 

A judge also should create an aura of fairness, an absolute feeling in the courtroom that both the litigants and all of the witnesses 

and everybody in front of the proceedings is being treated fairly 

and their arguments are being considered. Of course, their arguments won’t always be accepted, but it’s quite important that they 

know that when they appear in front of the judge, the judge is 

treating them fairly, considering their arguments very carefully, 

and making the best decisions possible. 

I could go on, but I want to let Mr. Holeman respond as well. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Mr. Holeman. 

Mr. HOLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I believe that a judge must have 

the ability to defuse the adversarial nature of the proceedings 

while at the same time allowing counsel the latitude to do their respective jobs, which are, frankly, the zealous representation of their 

clients. It’s a balancing act. 

I think that judges must be considerate in their handling of matters, but at the same time, they must be firm and certain in their 

rulings. 

I think a judge has to be collegial in his leading of counsel 

through the required work, yet serious in the dispensation of justice, which is the reason that litigants come to court in the first 

place. 

There are other qualities that I think that a judge must have. 

A judge must be patient with litigants and with their counsel. A 

judge must always, always uphold the dignity of the position, must 

be fair in his or her respect for each individual who appears before 

10

him or her, because, frankly, a lot of our litigants are underserved 

otherwise in society, and they look to the courts for fairness. 

A judge must always be well prepared. It’s very difficult for a 

judge to demand preparation of the counsel who appear before him 

or her yet fail to be prepared him- or herself. 

And, finally, Mr. Chairman, I believe that a judge must always, 

always remember the service aspect of the job. My belief is that if 

that is remembered and is placed in a position of prominence, then 

no one will have a question about ‘‘robe-itis,’’ as it’s called. It is a 

service position, and there are people who will appear with varying 

levels of intellect, varying economic status, and they must all be 

served by the judiciary. 

Senator VOINOVICH. Thank you very much. 

We may have some other questions that we will be submitting 

to you in writing, but I would like to thank you both for coming 

here today. I again want to emphasize that you have been through 

the Maginot Line, both of you. You have been interviewed and investigated. I have spent time with the counsel for the White House 

going over your backgrounds. And I think that we are fortunate 

that we have two fine individuals that have been nominated, and 

hopefully this Committee will be voting on your nominations sometime in the very near future. 

Again, I would like to thank you for your willingness to serve 

your country, and thank your family for the sacrifice that they are 

going to be making so that you can fulfill those responsibilities. 

Thank you very much for being here. 

Mr. HOLEMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your kind remarks. 

Mr. ISCOE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[Whereupon, at 9:32 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(11)

A P P E N D I X 


90238.001
12


90238.002
13


90238.003
14


90238.004
15


90238.005
16


90238.006
17


90238.007
18


90238.008
19


90238.009
20


90238.010
21


90238.011
22


90238.012
23


90238.013
24


90238.014
25


90238.015
26


90238.016
27


90238.017
28


90238.018
29


90238.019
30


90238.020
31


90238.021
32


90238.022
33


90238.023
34


90238.024
35


90238.025
36


90238.026
37


90238.027
38


90238.028
39


90238.029
40


90238.030
41


90238.031
42


90238.032
43


90238.033
44


90238.034
45


90238.035
46


90238.036
47


90238.037
48


90238.038
49


90238.039
50


90238.040
51


90238.041
52


90238.042
53


90238.043
54


90238.044
55


90238.045
56


90238.046
57


90238.047
58


90238.048
59


90238.049
60


90238.050
61


90238.051
62


90238.052
63


90238.053
64


90238.054
65


90238.055
66


90238.056
67


90238.057
68


90238.058
69


90238.059
70


90238.060
71


90238.061
72


90238.062
73


90238.063
74


90238.064
75


90238.065
76


90238.066
77


90238.067
78


90238.068
79


90238.069
80


90238.070
81


90238.071
82


90238.072
83


90238.073
84


90238.074
85


90238.075
86


90238.076
87


90238.077
88


90238.078
89


90238.079
90


90238.080
91


90238.081
92


90238.082
93


90238.083
94


90238.084
95


90238.085
96


90238.086
97


90238.087
98


90238.088
99


90238.089
100


90238.090
101


90238.091
102


90238.092
103


90238.093
104


90238.094
105


90238.095
106


90238.096
107


90238.097
108


90238.098
109


90238.099
110

Æ


90238.100