August 2, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S5965 

OFFICE OF THE REPUBLICAN LEADER, 

U.S. SENATE, 

Washington, DC, June 25, 2012. 

Mr. WILLIAM T. (BILL) ROBINSON III, 

President, American Bar Association, 321 North 

Clark Street, Chicago, IL. 

DEAR MR. ROBINSON: We were surprised to 

receive your letter of June 20, 2012 urging, 

for the first time, confirmation of particular 

circuit court nominees despite the existence 

of the Leahy-Thurmond Rule. By any objective measure—overall circuit court vacancy 

rate, vacancies on the respective circuit 

courts, or judicial emergency designation— 

our appellate courts are doing, at least as 

well, and in most respects much better, now 

than when our democratic colleagues invoked the Rule both times during the last 

administration. Given this exceptionally fair 

treatment of President Obama’s judicial 

nominees, it is curious that your organization would choose now to urge the Senate 

not to follow its practice of suspending the 

processing of circuit court nominations in 

the months preceding a presidential election. 

This unprecedented action raises questions 

about the American Bar Association’s objectivity and neutrality. 

While the circuit court vacancy rate in 

June 2008 was the same as it is now, there 

were twice as many judicial emergencies in 

the circuit courts at that time. The Fourth 

Circuit Court of Appeals, in fact, was in crisis. Fully one-fourth of its seats were empty, 

even though the prior administration had 

nominated outstanding individuals to till 

them. Despite the crisis facing the Fourth 

Circuit in June of 2008, our democratic colleagues refused to process any of President 

George W. Bush’s four, well qualified nominees. 

For instance, the Senate twice had unanimously confirmed Judge Robert Conrad to 

the important positions of United States Attorney and federal district court judge. By 

this time in June of 2008. his nomination to 

the Fourth Circuit had been pending for 344 

days. Our democratic colleagues refused to 

process his nomination, notwithstanding 

support from home state senators, a unanimous well qualified rating from your organization, and—in contradistinction to any of 

the three nominees mentioned in your letter—the Administrative Office of the U.S. 

Courts had declared the vacancy to which he 

was nominated to be a judicial emergency. 

Senate democrats refused to process three 

other qualified nominees to the Fourth Circuit. Steve Matthews had support from home 

state senators, and by this time in 2008, had 

been pending for 293 days. Judge Glen Conrad 

had been confirmed to the district court in 

2003 by the unanimous vote of 89–0. Both 

home state senators, one republican and one 

democrat, strongly supported his nomination. Rod Rosenstein, the then and current 

U.S. Attorney for Maryland, also would have 

filled a judicial emergency on the Fourth 

Circuit. Nonetheless, democrat home state 

Senators blocked his nomination—incredibly—for the reason that he was doing a 

‘‘good job’’ as U.S. Attorney and ‘‘that’s 

where [they] need him.’’ 

Our democratic colleagues’ record with respect to these nominees was so abysmal that 

even the Washington Post editorial board 

called them to task, writing. ‘‘[T]he Senate 

should act in good faith to fill vacancies— 

not as a favor to the president but out of respect for the residents, businesses, defendants and victims of crime in the region the 

4th Circuit covers.’’ The ABA, by contrast, 

said nothing when Senate democrats invoked 

the Leahy-Thurmond Rule and stopped processing circuit court nominations in June of 

2008. These outstanding nominees, along 

with others like Peter Keisler—who by this 

date in June of 2008 had been bottled up in 

committee for an astonishing 727 days—did 

not merit any special consideration by the 

ABA in the months preceding the last presidential election. 

The situation on our circuit courts was 

equally dismal in June of 2004 when President Bush was concluding his first term in 

office. The overall vacancy rate on our circuit courts was much higher than it is now. 

And the Sixth Circuit, like the Fourth Circuit in 2008, was in crisis, with fully onefourth of its seats empty, even though the 

prior administration had nominated qualified individuals to fill those vacancies as 

well. And as in 2008. the ABA said nothing 

when our democratic colleagues cited the 

Leahy-Thurmond Rule—this time to justify 

filibustering several circuit court nominees 

in the months preceding the 2004 presidential 

election. 

The ABA presents itself to the public as a 

non-partisan. professional organization. 

However, it has chosen to advocate for this 

Administration’s circuit court nominees in 

the few remaining months before this presidential election, when it chose not to do so 

before either of the last two presidential 

elections despite much more compelling circumstances. This sort of selective advocacy 

is precisely why so many people question the 

ABA’s professed neutrality. 

We will continue to work with the senate 

majority to process judicial nominations, 

consistent with the practices of the Senate— 

practices strongly defended by our Democratic colleagues during the previous administration and about which the ABA said 

nothing. Indeed, the Senate will vote on another judicial nomination tomorrow. If confirmed, that will be the 151st lower court 

confirmation already for this Administration, in addition to two Supreme Court 

nominations—a confirmation total far greater than what was achieved under comparable 

circumstances during the last administration. We hope that in the future the ABA 

will take a balanced approach to assessing 

the judicial confirmation process in the Senate. 

Sincerely, 

MITCH MCCONNELL, 

Republican Leader, 

U.S. Senate. 

CHUCK GRASSLEY, 

Ranking Member, Judiciary Committee 

f 

U.S. Senate. 

RECOGNIZING THE SISTERS OF ST. 

JOSEPH OF BRENTWOOD, NY 

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, We 

rise today to honor three great American heroes and their devoted organization. In Long Island, NY there are 

three American nuns that have been 

working to ease the burden of the poor 

and the sick and educate our youth for 

the past 80 years. 

Sister Francis Gerard Kress, Sister 

Edward Joseph Murphy and Sister 

Alice Francis Young are all nuns with 

the Sisters of St. Joseph of Brentwood, 

NY and have given this order and their 

community over 80 years of service. 

Mrs. GILLIBRAND. The Sisters of St. 

Joseph first came to the United States 

to Carondelet, MO in 1836, and established a school dedicated to the education of deaf children. Mother Austin 

Kean, accompanied by Sister Baptista 

Hanson and Sister Theodosia Hegeman, 

came to Brooklyn in 1856 to found what 

is now, the Sisters of St. Joseph of 

Brentwood, NY. The goal of the Sisters 

of St. Joseph continues to be to foster 

love, unity and reconciliation among 

all people and with this earth. For over 

150 years, the Sisters of St. Joseph of 

Brentwood, NY have been faithful in 

their vision to serve the world and its 

people. Since the creation of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Brentwood order 

in 1856, there has been over 2,500 Sisters 

to serve, and currently there are 588 

serving or in retirement throughout 

the United States. 

There is not enough time in this Congress to fully describe the work and accomplishments of the Sisters of St. Joseph. But I would like to highlight 

some of the work of these three remarkable nuns. 

Sister Alice Francis Young joined the 

Convent of the Sisters of St. Joseph in 

1932, and since then has proven to be a 

pioneer and integral force in early 

childhood education. Sister Young’s career milestones include helping to start 

the first Head Start program in New 

York, working as a master teacher at 

St. Joseph’s College in Brooklyn for 20 

years, and being a professor of child 

study at St. Joseph’s for over 40 years. 

She has helped educate thousands of 

children and given them the ability to 

reach their potential. 

Sister Francis Gerard Kress has been 

a Sister of St. Josephs for 80 years, 

working on community activism and 

being a champion for health care and 

environmental protection. In September 1982, Sister Kress testified before the U.S. House of Representatives 

Subcommittee on Water Resources and 

in doing so shed light on her work 

around the environmental dangers that 

existed near Newton Creek in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, NY. Her work has 

since helped to protect a community 

from these dangers and enlighten the 

Nation to the importance of the Clean 

Water Act. 

Sister Edward Joseph Murphy is 99 

years old and joined the Order of the 

Sisters of St. Joseph in 1932. She spent 

her life educating at the primary and 

secondary levels, helping children 

throughout this Nation improve their 

lives through education and community service, as well as help new arrivals to this Nation with English by way 

of her Orders’ English as a Second Language programs. Sister Murphy also 

spent over 20 years caring for the community and residents of Merrick, Long 

Island, NY by visiting homes, nursing 

homes and hospitals, bringing food and 

toys, and assisting in times of crisis. 

For the past 80 years, Sister Francis 

Gerard Kress, Sister Edward Joseph 

Murphy and Sister Alice Francis 

Young have dedicated their lives for 

the betterment of others in New York, 

the United States and around the 

world. We are humbled to have the opportunity to recognize the life and 

service of these amazing women and 

everlasting mark they left on so many. 

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, we 

would like the United States Senate to 


bjneal on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE
S5966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE August 2, 2012 

recognize and honor the work of the 

Sisters of St. Joseph of Brentwood, NY; 

and the lifelong dedication of Sisters 

Francis Gerard Kress, Edward Joseph 

Murphy and Alice Francis Young for 

their 80 years of service to their religion, professions and country. 

f 

REMEMBERING GORE VIDAL 

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I 

rise to pay tribute to the great talents 

and accomplishments of Gore Vidal, 

the extraordinary American writer who 

died this week at age 86 in California, 

where he spent the last 9 years of his 

life. 

Gore Vidal was a child of the Senate—or more precisely, a grandchild of 

the Senate. His maternal grandfather 

was Senator Thomas Pryor Gore of 

Oklahoma, and the writer’s happiest 

childhood memories were of the times 

he lived at Senator Gore’s Washington 

home. According to Vidal’s New York 

Times obituary, ‘‘He loved to read to 

his grandfather, who was blind, and 

sometimes accompanied him onto the 

Senate floor.’’ Vidal himself later said, 

‘‘At something like 13 or 14, I wanted 

to be a politician, but knew that I was 

a writer. . . .’’ 

This change of career path worked 

out best for everyone. Gore Vidal’s 

prose was elegant and crystal clear, 

and his range as a writer has seldom 

been equaled. His essays, perhaps his 

greatest triumph, utilized and displayed his wide-ranging interests, encyclopedic learning, and dazzling wit. 

He also wrote more than two dozen 

novels including a series on American 

political history that is widely read 

and admired on both sides of the aisle— 

as well as plays, screenplays, television 

dramas, and two volumes of memoirs. 

Gore Vidal twice ran for office, losing 

a 1960 run for Congress in upstate New 

York and a 1982 Senate primary in 

California. Despite these political setbacks, he remained convinced that 

‘‘There is no human problem which 

could not be solved if people would 

simply do as I advise.’’ He dispensed his 

advice with great wit and intelligence 

for more than 60 years, and America is 

far the richer for it. 

f 

DROUGHT IMPACT 

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise 

today to speak about the devastating 

impact the drought gripping nearly 80 

percent of the country is having on 

food producers. 

Fewer natural occurrences are more 

devastating to agricultural production 

than extreme drought. The drought 

conditions the United States is facing 

today are considered the worst the 

country has seen in more than 50 years. 

Data computed in the Palmer 

Drought Severity Index indicate that 

the severity of the current drought is 

on par with the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. 

USDA has determined that more 

than 1,000 counties in 26 States, encompassing more than two thirds of the 

lower 48, are experiencing drought conditions. Drought conditions stretch 

from coast to coast and encompass 

nearly every State south of 42nd parallel west of the Mississippi River 

while also including nearly all of Florida, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina. It is also worth noting that farmers on Delmarva peninsula are coping 

with a drought of their own as well as 

record high temperatures. 

While these conditions undoubtedly 

present challenges for commodity 

growers, agricultural science, modern 

farming techniques and a series of financial support programs help commodity growers cope with increasingly 

difficult growing conditions. 

These advances in farming, combined 

with robust grower supports like commodity direct payments and federally 

subsidized crop insurance premiums, 

along with a high market price for 

corn, driven by increased demand for 

corn from a variety of sectors, including ethanol producers who must meet 

government mandates to produce 15.2 

billion gallons of ethanol this year, all 

help U.S. grain growers survive this 

difficult growing season. 

Our national farm support programs 

are centered on assuring the financial 

security of commodity growers. However, there is little to no assurances on 

the availability and affordability of 

corn feed for livestock and poultry and 

for food production broadly. 

This issue hits very close to home for 

me as Maryland’s poultry industry continues to struggle tremendously during 

this drought because there is so little 

corn feed available. What feed is available is extremely expensive. 

Feed accounts for more than 75 percent of the cost of raising poultry. 

Corn futures project the price of corn 

hitting $9 dollars a bushel by the end of 

the summer. As the price of feed continues to rise, feed costs will make up 

an even greater percentage of the cost 

to grow birds to market weight. 

And unlike raising hogs and cattle, 

which ruminant species that can eat 

other types of feed like soybeans or 

hay, chickens can only eat grains—in 

other words corn. 

To understand how important the 

availability of affordable corn is let’s 

take a look at chicken by the numbers: 

As of today, the price per bushel of 

corn is $8.20. 

One bushel of corn equals 56 pounds 

of shelled corn. 

On average, it takes 7 weeks and 131⁄2

pounds of corn to raise a single chicken 

to market weight. 

Market weight for a single chicken is 

approximately six pounds, although 

the weight of the bird that is actually 

meat is probably somewhere closer to 

three or four pounds. 

Approximately four birds can be 

raised, from egg to slaughter, on a 

bushel of shelled corn—or, a little more 

than $2 worth of corn. 

The retail price for a whole three 

pound chicken at a popular Maryland 

supermarket chain is $6 (at $2 per lb). 

That means that the retail price of a 

pound of chicken is equal to the price 

of corn feed. And corn is just one input 

cost to raising poultry. 

Clearly market conditions like this 

are not sustainable for maintaining a 

viable domestic poultry industry. 

Domestic poultry, beef, and pork producers operate without the safety nets 

commodity growers have. Those domestic producers that are still owned 

by U.S.-based companies are at an even 

greater disadvantage, because many of 

the foreign owned meat and poultry 

companies in the U.S. can afford to operate at a loss for extended periods of 

time because they have financial backing from state-run banks overseas. 

Our meat and poultry producers are 

in dire need of relief if they are going 

to survive into the future. One way to 

provide some relief for poultry and 

livestock growers would be to modify 

the Renewable Fuel Standard’s ethanol 

production mandate for corn ethanol so 

as to provide our farmers better access 

to the corn stocks they need. 

Food producers—including livestock 

and poultry producers, who use tremendous amounts of corn to raise their 

livestock and produce food—do not 

have the luxury of a mandated market 

for their products. 

I understand the important role domestic ethanol production will play in 

helping our Nation achieve greater energy security. However, the nurturing 

and growth of our domestic biofuels industry must not come at the expense of 

our domestic food supply. In other 

words, we cannot sacrifice U.S. food security for energy security. That is why 

I do not support the use of food based 

feedstocks like sugar and corn to be 

commercially produced into ethanol. 

Domestic food production is reaching 

a state of crisis driven by the increasing cost of inputs, like corn, that the 

food producers have to unfairly compete with industries that are operating 

with under government production 

mandates. 

That is why Senators BOOZMAN, MIKULSKI and I introduced legislation 

making a simple change to the Renewable Fuel Standard to help provide domestic food producers access to corn. 

This legislation will link the amount 

of corn ethanol required for the RFS to 

the amount of U.S. corn supplies. This 

legislation sets up a process so that 

when the USDA reports on U.S. corn 

supplies towards the end of each year, 

based upon the ratio of corn stocks to 

expected use, there could be a reduction made to the RFS mandate for corn 

ethanol. This is a commonsense solution to make sure that we have enough 

corn supplies to meet all of our corn 

demands. 

Once a year, the administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency will 

review the current corn crop year’s 

ratio of U.S. corn stocks-to-use ratio in 

making a determination of the RFS. 

Another way to deliver some of this 

needed relief would be for the House to 

immediately pass the Senate Farm Bill 


bjneal on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE