mr. vandyke is. his nomination is opposed by over 200 conservation, education, civil rights, and other organizations. he is also opposed by six former montana supreme court justices. folks that montanans did elect to sit on the highest court in our state. they wrote of mr. vandyke, it is doubtful that he understands the judicial decisions must be based solely on the facts of the case and on the law. we strongly believe that mr. vandyke has demonstrated that he has neither the qualifications nor the temperament to serve as a federal court of appeals judge. his coworkers from his time as montana's solicitor general seem to agree. the former assistant attorney general who worked with vandyke wrote privately to his colleagues ever since he has arrived, mr. vandyke has been arrogant and disrespectful to others both in and outside this office. he avoids work. he does not have the skills to reform nor the desire to learn how to perform the work of a lawyer. now that he has resigned -- that's when he resigne

mr. vandyke's court. that predilection -- never disavowed, never refuted, never denied -- should be disqualifying. worse still, in the same questionnaire, mr. vandyke stated that the only reason he is not currently a member of the n.r.a. was that he didn't, quote, want to risk recusal if a lawsuit came before me where the n.r.a. was involved, end quote. in other words, he would join the n.r.a., he supports n.r.a., he feels that he should be a member of the n.r.a., he wants to rule in favor of the n.r.a., but he might have to recuse himself if he joined the n.r.a. that statement alone should be disqualifying. we're talking here, remember, about a life-tenured position on the federal judiciary, not just for a few years, not an elected position on a state court -- a federal nomination to the second highest appellate-level court in the united states. second only to the united states supreme court. mr. vandyke's hostility to commonsense gun violence prevention also led him to challenge a law based -- passed by

mr. vandyke who is unqualified in comparison to some of the worst nominees that we've seen under this administration. vandyke has a history of bigoted writing about lgbtq, radical views on gun safety legislation and approving hostility to reproductive rights. on top of his radical views, vandyke has received stunningly negative reviews on his qualifications and temperament. the american bar association doesn't do this much, but it rated him not qualified. in over 60 interviews with vandyke's colleagues, he was described as, quote, arrogant, lazy, and idealogue and lacking in knowledge of the day-to-day practice. it went on to say, quote, the nominee lacks humility, has an entitlement temperament, does not have an open mind and does not always have a commitment to being candid and truthful. this is who we're voting on today, my republican friends. what is going on here? because someone is hard right and radical, we excuse all of their personality defects found by the a.b.a.? and amazingly, this is someone not even for a district court but the circuit court. this is getting to the point of utter absur

under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive to resume consideration of the vandyke nomination. mr. cornyn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, as all america knows, climbing health care costs continue to keep the american people up at night. a kaiser foundation poll in september found that the number one health concern of the american people is prescription drug pricing, a whopping 70% of those polled think that lowering prescription drug costs should be a top priority -- a top priority for congress. making it the number one item on our to-do list. but our friend and colleague from new york, the minority leader, objected last time i offered unanimous consent to take up and pass a bill, which i'll describe here momentarily and i hope given the intervening time and reflection he will not do so today and we can get this bill passed and address this top priority of the american people. the good news is republicans and democrats both agree we need to do something about it. i have the honor of serving on both the finance and judiciary

the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, lawrence vandyke of nevada to be united states circuit judge for the ninth circuit. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of lawrence vandyke of nevada to be united states circuit judge for the ninth circuit, signed by 17 senators as follows -- mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session and consider calendar number 530. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the mot

mr. vandyke was nominated, there are certainly abundant opportunities to choose qualified nominees. we can and we should do better than this. in my state of delaware, my senior senator, tom carper, and i worked together to help form a bipartisan judicial nominating committee to fill two vacancies on our district court. we felt strongly we had to reach out to the white house and work with them to identify consensus nominees who would be the best candidates whom we could both support and whom the president could nominate. ultimately, we had a very productive process and the president nominate maryellen nature yeaio who we both returned positive blue slips for and have ultimately been confirmed by this body and now seated. this is how the process should work. we should be able to consult back and forth between the executive and legislative until we find competent, capable, qualified judges of whom we can all be proud. the senate should not be a rubber stamp regardless of the quality of nominees that get sent over. and i will continue to oppose president trump's nominees who are undeser

. -- the question occurs on the vandyke nomination. mr. barrasso: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: -- is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote: is vote: vote: the presiding officer: are there any members in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? seeing none, the yeas are 51, the nays are 44. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider the -- is considered made and laid on the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of john joseph sullivan of maryland to be ambassador of the united states of america to the russian federation, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate