that's what they said. it the headline. one of i was oldest newspaper in this reference here is unprecedented by the senior senator of iowa and republican leader to deny the president the right to fill a supreme court vacancy. a few weeks back when the senate passed a vote we allowed this service to us. we gave grassley and add a boy for that. we take it back. we take it back. that's a blistering statement. a revealing statement. we take it back. here's the lesson that senator grassley should learn from this

editorial. by refusing president obama supreme court nominee a hearing, or vote they swore when they became a united states senator. this evocation of our responsibility will epitomize their work in the united states as a senator. what they accomplish their careers will be secondary over their job, remember our job is to vote, that that is what we swore to do. follow the constitution. in the constitution's is make clear on this issue. so the stakes should even be higher for senator grassley and the other republican senators, why? because as chairman he has one of the most important proceeding committees in the united states senate. this has is been the case for 200 years. 200 years.

the senate judiciary committee was established 200 years ago. in 1816 it was one of the original 11 standing committees, decades past, throughout history president martin van buren when he was president, senator ted kennedy, joe biden, they regarded at all costs. so independent in fact past chairman stood firm to face opposition from presidents and senate leadership. their crucial times in history they looked at the judicial committee to do the right thing. during the civil war chairman of

illinois authored the 13th amendment to abolish slavery. during the civil war. we know during the period of time there is great turmoil about what should be done. during the early days of this illegal board. in a 289 -- 1889 -- in 1937 of nevada led the committee to stand against franklin roosevelt the chairman was a democrat just like roosevelt they maintained independence, alvin barkley,

longtime united states senator but he became vice president later. imagine that, he was senate majority leader, he was from kentucky, imagine that. judiciary committee's chair's chair standing up to the majority leader from kentucky. the accomplishments of these powerful chairs and others are the historical which the senior senator from iowa should be leading. if he keeps his current obstruction history will not be kind as tenure of the committee. as of today the chairman's authority to the public leader. the chairman has turned a partial reputation into an

extension of the trump campaign. just last month chairman grassley spoke at a rally for donald trump in iowa. at that rally the chairman said and i quote, we have had this trend going this way, away from the basic principles of our government so we have an opportunity once again to make america great again. before eight" remember what he said we have had this trend going away from the basic principles that have established our government. the senator from iowa would do well to look at his own committee as it turns away again from the basic principles that establish our government. that is what the senator from iowa said at a trump rally. even now he and his committee are wasting millions of taxpayer

dollars. it's been going on for many months, including asking for maternity leave, records for staffers, and timesheets in her office. just basic staff people. for months senator grassley, even career officers who are here so we could give them a raise, he held that up and people can understand it. it had nothing to do a secretary clinton, he did it as a way to way to weaken the presidency of president obama. he has done his damage, election day is eight months away and it is affecting almost every action taken by the grassley judiciary committee. there's much more more at stake here than senator grassley's reputation. the future of this institution hangs in the balance.

when the senate is under mind, our democracies undermine. future generations will suffer a rougher ability, the senator iowa continues to do the bidding for the public leader and the donald trump's of the republican party. senator grassley and i worked together for three decades, the first speech i gave here on the senate floor, i served a couple of terms in the house, my c was right back there. i gave my first speech i talked about the taxpayers bill of rights, presiding on the senate that day was it david pryor from arkansas. he was chairman of the subcommittee on internal revenue service. senator grassley was listening, they both contact me and i received a note from senator

pryor and a call from senator grassley saying i really like that legislation, i will work to help you. and they did, did, and we get that pass. i have nothing personal against senator grassley, i like him, he help me as a brand-new freshman senator. but today, as united states senator has a duty to speak when the united states senate violates the united states constitution. as a i have a duty for the judiciary committee considers the nominee, especially someone to fill a vacancy in the supreme court. >> .. is not personal, it's professional, and it's substantive. the senior senator from iowa outlined that job himself when he assumed the chairmanship of the judiciary committee. when he took over as chairman,

he promised republicans, and i quote -- "to restore the senate to the deliberative body the founders intended." i mean, listen to that. that's what he said -- "to restore the senate to the deliberative body the founders intended." that's a quote. he said he took the responsibility, another quote, -- "of vetting the nominees for life-time appointments to the federal judiciary very seriously." close quote. the senior senator from iowa >> >> the voters he is the first chair of this important committee to refuse to lead, conduct

hearings for a supreme court nomination. to refuse the meeting or the hearing so other people know how important the coaches. 7,545 consecutive but what what good is the chairmanship if it's a rubber stamp for partisan politics. what good is the chairmanship if it's used to weaken the senate and disrupt our constitutional system of checks and balances, and that's what it does. last week the "des moines register" published an open letter from one of senator grassley's former employees. it was stunning.

he worked here in the senate. this man captures what's at stake here, and i quote -- "the institution of the senate has managed to perform its constitutional obligations for well over 200 years. every single nominee for the supreme court that is not withdrawn from consideration has received a vote within 125 days. today i feel nothing but shame for the fact that my senator, my former friend, will bring that unbroken history to an end." close quote. that was headline last week in the "des moines register." iowa's largest newspaper. i hope the chairman of the judiciary committee doesn't continue down this path. it will not benefit him, his committee, the senate, the state of iowa or this great country. instead he should follow the example of his predecessors and give president obama's supreme court nominee a meeting, a hearing and a vote. he simply should do his job. if he doesn't

>> >> history will never forget this step by grassley. >> weld madam president another day and another tantrum from the minority leader. but it doesn't matter how much the minority leader jumps up and down how much he stomps his feet, we will not let liberals fear getaway to denied the american people an opportunity to be heard. letting the american people decide was a reasonable approach. a fair approach and historical. as the other side had

advocated the issue is of the of their foot in with the american people deserve they deserved an opportunity and responsibility to do it right instead of rushing to a judgment. to have a reasonable justice to make the right decisions. as the american people are voting for their presidential election you face the choice. >>guest: another justice to apply their own ethics when deciding important for every american?