tv Minority Leader Schumer on Presidential Nominations CSPAN January 10, 2017 12:52am-1:04am EST
the presidential inauguration of donald trump is friday january 20. c-span will have live coverage of all of the ceremony. watch live on c-span and c-span.org and listen on the free radio app. senate minority leader chuck schumer spoke about the cabinet nominations and democratic conditions for moving forward quickly. his remarks are about tent. minutes. mr. president, last week i expressed my sincere hope that the majority leade majority lead come to an agreement on the process of nominations. he's negotiated in good faith and we have made some progress. i sincerely appreciate his willingness to work with us socr
far. but i do want to clarify why democrats are doing this.te yesterday my friend of the majority leademajority leader wn television and suggested that we were raising concerns about thee nominations out of anger. he chalked up these little procedural complaints and suggested democrats grow up. n we are not doing this for sport. democrats feel very strongly that pushing for a thorough and thoughtful vetting process is the right thing to do and here's why. the democratic majority he was and is concerned about the schedule that is so jammed right now but several high imports and hearings will fall on the same day depriving senators and the american people the chance to fully participate in the process of the nominees.he
the caucus was and is concerned about the timely completion of the standard paperwork and ethics clearance for nomineesah before proceeding .-full-stop my head with confirmation hearingsd and votes. bear in mind the nominees opposed to give a really difficult catholics and conflict challenges. they come many of them froms enormous wealth. many have vast holdings in stock and very few have experience in government so they've not been appropriately vetted for something like the cabinet post before. standard practice for the vast majority of nominees the completion of a preliminary ethics review for the nomination was skipped over for the vast majority of the nominees. in fact the independent office of government ethics went so far
as to send a letter warning that the republicans scheduled has created undue pressure on staff and agency ethics officials to rush through these important p reviews. the office is nonpartisan and has never been political so this has nothing to do with politics. i am not aware, wrote the any director, at any occasion in the four decades since established when the senate held apleted confirmation hearing before the nominee had completed the ethics review process. and the same majority leader my friend senator mcconnell who suggested democrats were raising concern for resentment in fact raise the same concerns in 2009 when he was minority leader.
in fact been minority leader mcconnelthen minority leadermccy leader read a letter laying out his prerequisites for tyingim agreements on the floor for president obama is nominees. almost exactly what democrats requested. i don't bring this up to play gotcha. i'm giving it to show requests are eminently reasonable and in fact have been shared by the leaders of both parties.rs i'm going to read the letter because it's amazing how it mirrors our request. it was sent to harry reid from mitch mcconnell in 2009. the senate has the constitutional duty to provide its advice and consent on presidential nominations, the duty that we take seriously. appropri
in consultation we confirmed the commitment to conduct the appropriate review of these nominations consistent with the long-standing best practices of committees regardless of the majority. the practices serve the senate well and we will insist on the consistent applications agreemeo therefore prior to considering any tying agreements on the floor of any nominee we expect the following standards to be sd met. the fbi background check is complete and submitted to the committee prior to a hearing being noticed. the office of government ethics letter is complete and submitted to the committee and tying for review and prior to the3 committee hearing.
three, financial disclosure statements and applicable tax review p returns are complete and submitd it for review prior to a hearine being noticed. all committee questionnaires are complete and has been returned to the committee. a reasonable opportunity for follow-up questions have been afforded committee members and nominees have answered with sufficient time for review prior to a committee vote. five, the nominees willing ton e have staff interviews figure that has been the practice. six, the nominee has had a hearing in degrees to courtesy visits with members when requested, and eight, the nominee has committed to cooperate with the ranking member for requests of information and transparency. there will be initial requirements got the letter continues, honoring the traditions of the senate for
judicial nominees. these commonsense standards and long-standing practices will ensure that the senate has had the opportunity to review a nominee's record and make an informed decision prior to the s vote, sincerely mitch mcconnell, republican leader and i ask unanimous consent to let her be added to the record. return t >> without objection. >> i plan to return the exact same letter to my friend the majority leader with the same request. in 2009 that minority leader called these benchmarks - commonsense standards and long-standing practices and i agree with him. they don't indicate a lack of maturity. they show an abundance of common sense and i would remind the
majority that many nominees havb actually failed to meet the qualifications laid out by this letter given the hearing schedule. many mr. president, the majority leader is fond of mentioning that any obama nominees passed quickly in 2009 and he asks we do the same but there is a difference between 2009 and today. president obama is nominees that all the standards laid out in the minority leader's letter. president elect trump's nomineen have not. back ..ck before the senate considered their nomination. president-elect trump's nominees are way behind that mark.
mr. president, i only ask respectfully that the republican majority follow the same set of standards they had in 2009 when the shoe was on the other foot. especially because these nominees raise particular concerns. the standards we've laid out as leaders of both parties address conflict of interest and security concerns. those, of course, are prime concerns. but there's another concern as well. these nominees have even collectively very little experience or record in government. many of them have taken positions quite different from the >> >> if representative prices for the privatization of social security than the
president-elect said he is not then what position will nominee price take? or putting all these hearingsrun fm and to wonder today's may committee members run from committee to committee makes no sense after all they will hold these nominees incredibly powerful positions potentially in next four years. to spend an extra day or two on each nominee even if it o takes every takes a few weeks to get through is well worth it to it is only fair that they're given a thorough and thoughtful vetting and abide by the long standing ethics practices that were established and laid out quite clearly by the majority leader himself to be sure they're in good