WE HAVE HEARD ASSERTIONS MADE ABOUT YOU AND YOUR CHARACTER AND BACKGROUND. NARROWING IN JUST A FEW. I WILL PUT FOR THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT ALL OF THIS IS ABOUT, IN AN ATTEMPT TO DISTRACT FROM YOUR BROAD SUPPORT, YOUR DEEP RECORD, YOUR OUTSTANDING INTELLECTUAL AND LEGAL CREDENTIALS, WE ARE TAKING WHAT IS A POLICY DISPUTE THAT SHOULD BE DECIDED BY MEMBERS OF THE SENATE. IF WE WANT TO CHANGE THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES TO MAKE THE MANDATORY, RATHER THAN AN ADVISORY, IF WE WANT TO CHANGE THE STRUCTURE IN WHICH FEDERAL JUDGE IMPOSES SENTENCING, WE CAN DO THAT. BUT TO DEMAND THAT YOU BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THIS PRACTICE THAT IS NATIONWIDE AND IS YEARS OLD, I VIEW AS AN UNFAIR MISREPRESENTATION OF YOUR RECORD. IF I COULD, LET'S GO TO SOMETHING THAT YOU DID AS THE VICE CHAIR OF THE SENTENCING COMMISSION. A VOTE YOU TOOK IN 2014. IN MY VIEW, IT SHOWS HOW FUNDAMENTALLY MISGUIDED ARE THE ATTACKS TRYING TO CHARACTERIZE YOU AS SOMEONE WHO AT ALL COSTS WILL DO WHAT YOU CAN TO HELP CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS. LET ME LAY OUT THE CONTEXT FOR A MOMENT. IN 2010, CONGRESS, ENACTING A POLICY CHOICE, DENSELY -- UNANIMOUSLY -- THE SENTENCING FROM CRACK COCAINE TO POWDER COCAINE FROM 100 TO 81. THIS LAW MEANT THOSE CURRENTLY IN PRISON ON CRACK OFFENSES COULD SEEK TO SHORTEN THEIR SENTENCES. FOUR YEARS LATER THE COMMISSION FURTHER CONCLUDED THE PEOPLE WHO COOPERATED AND HELD OUT THE PROSECUTION COULD USE THIS LAW TO SHORTEN THEIR SENTENCE RETROACTIVELY BEYOND ANY BREAK THEY MAY HAVE GOTTEN FOR THEIR COOPERATION. YOU DISAGREED. IN YOUR PUBLIC REMARKS AT THE TIME, IT MIGHT SEEM LOGICAL YOU WOULD SUPPORT THIS DIRECTION, YOU COULD NOT DO SO BECAUSE YOU CONCLUDED IT WAS MANIFESTLY INCONSISTENT WITH THE LAW AND CREATE UNFAIR DISPARITIES WITH THOSE PREVIOUSLY SENTENCE COOPERATING AND THOSE SENTENCED TODAY. IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR VIEW, IT WAS THAT THE SENSE OF A COOPERATOR SHOULDN'T BE BASED ON THE SENTENCING RANGE IS MODIFIED BY THE FAIR SENTENCING ACT WHAT WAS BEST UNDERSTOOD AS A FIXED DISCOUNT OF THE MANDATORY MINIMUM THAT A FAIR SENTENCING ACT HAD NOT CHANGE. I KNOW THIS IS TECHNICAL, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE I AM CHARACTERIZING THIS CORRECTLY BEFORE REACHING A CONCLUSION. DO I UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT CORRECTLY IN WHICH YOU MADE THIS DECISION? 