“This measure is extremely important to our community and I am thrilled to see it passed,” Candelaria said. “We have confirmation that the system in place was not working and unfairly penalizing minorities across the state. Now, we will have a mechanism in place that to some extent, will maintain municipalities under scrutiny.”

The bill modifies the 1999 Racial Profiling Prohibition Act championed by the late Sen. Alvin Penn of Bridgeport, which requires police departments to forward data on traffic stops to the African-American Affairs Commission (AAAC) to assess for evidence of racial profiling. The new law sets standards for reporting the information and shifts responsibility for its analysis to the governor’s budget office, which has more staff and resources available than AAAC.

In addition, the legislation also allows the state to withhold public safety-related funds from communities that don't comply. A 2011 analysis of more than 100,000 traffic stops by dozens of local police departments found that black and Hispanic drivers are significantly more likely to receive a ticket or a court date than white drivers stopped for the same offense.

Previously passed by the Senate, the bill now goes to Governor Dannel P. Malloy who indicated he would sign it into law. “This is a real problem that deserves a real solution, and my administration is committed to carrying out the spirit and letter of this law,” said Gov. Malloy.

El Representante estatal Juan Candelaria (D-New Haven) originalmente presento la medida en el 2011. Sin embargo, fue este año que logró que el comité judicial de la legislatura la incluyera en la agenda que exitosamente se aprobó. Candelaria, quien habló a favor de la propuesta en el hemiciclo durante el debate explicó, “Nuestra comunidad ha sido victima de notarios públicos que han utilizado su sello para proveer consejo legal no correcto cobrando altas sumas de dinero por servicio no autorizado. En nuestros países, un notario público por lo general ejerce la profesión de abogado y algunos notarios públicos del estado tomaron ventaja de esto. Esta ley, cuidará a nuestra población latina de futuros abusos.”

El Rep. Andrés Ayala (D-Bridgeport) quien apoyo la ley que protegerá a las comunidades mas vulnerables a esta practica comentó, “Es lamentable que individuos sin escrúpulos ni ética profesional hayan victimizado a personas en nuestra comunidad. Un notario publico que no es abogado, no tiene la preparación académica o necesaria para representar a clientes en asuntos legales.”

El Rep. Hector Robles (D-Hartford) señaló, “Estoy muy complacido de haber respaldado esta propuesta. Recibí llamadas de personas que fueron victimas y hoy estamos mas cerca de resolver este asunto.”

“El abuso en contra de aquellos que no conocen la ley y que no se saben defender no se puede permitir. Esta ley envía un mensaje claro de que tomamos esto muy en serio,” manifestó la Rep. Minnie González (D-Hartford).

El Rep. Kelvin Roldan (D-Hartford) citó, “Estoy muy satisfecho de apoyar una ley que protege a la comunidad y a la vez protege a los abogados, notarios y abogados notarios legítimos.”

El Rep. Ezequiel Santiago (D-Bridgeport) dijo, “Ya era tiempo de detener el abuso en contra de una comunidad sensible y que confía en anuncios confusos que los convierten en victimas.”

“Estoy de acuerdo con mis colegas en definir claramente y sin lugar a duda los que son abogados-notarios legítimos y los que son solamente notarios públicos,” expresó el Rep. Robert Sanchez (D-New Britain).

El Rep. David Aldarondo (D-Waterbury) dijo, “Esta ley proveerá a los oficiales una herramienta útil para proteger a nuestra gente hispana.”

La ley, HB 5147 requiere que si un notario público no es abogado, tendrá que explícitamente incluirlo en cualquier anuncio que utilice para promover sus servicios. Esto evitara, que personas falsamente crean que el notario público es también abogado. Violadores de la ley serán sujetos a multas de $250.00 y/o dos meses de encarcelamiento.

“This minimum wage increase, while small, is a step in the right direction to help ease the burden on hard working families in our state,” Candelaria said. “It is important that our workers understand that we are doing what we can to support them and ensure we provide the elements for them to move forward during these difficult financial times.”

House Bill 5291 would raise Connecticut’s minimum wage by $.50 to $8.75 per hour in two steps.  The minimum wage would increase from the current rate of $8.25 to $8.50 on January 1, 2013, and then to $8.75 on January 1, 2014. The legislation also includes minor adjustments to the minimum wage for restaurant wait-staff and bartenders who receive tips.

Although the minimum wage has been raised seventeen times since 1979 it has effectively decreased by 11 percent when adjusted for the cost of living.

“A single parent of three making the current minimum wage will only earn $17,160 working full time – far below the federal poverty threshold of $22,190,” Rep. Candelaria said.

A recent Quinnipiac poll indicates that 70% of Connecticut residents support raising the minimum wage.

Candelaria said, “106,000 workers in Connecticut earn minimum wage – almost 7 percent of our entire workforce.  Connecticut residents recognize these hardworking individuals need a raise.”

The bill now goes to the Senate for consideration.

The legislation lists various diseases for which marijuana could be prescribed to ease related pain and symptoms including cancer, glaucoma and multiple sclerosis. Licensed pharmacists approved by the Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) would fill the prescriptions.

“Palliative use of marijuana is definitely a good option for patients who are suffering from debilitating illnesses,” Candelaria said. “We heard many compelling personal stories from people who found relief using it. I am glad to see passage of this bill after years of hard work to get it done.”

Candelaria noted that no insurance company would be required to provide coverage for prescribed marijuana. In addition, medical cannabis could only be grown and dispensed within Connecticut borders and could not be imported or exported. Use of the herb by patients would be prohibited in public, the workplace or in the presence of a minor. DCP along with an 8-doctor board would oversee implementation of the new medical marijuana law.

The legislation received bipartisan support and now moves to the state Senate for consideration. If passed there and eventually signed into law by Governor Malloy, it would take effect October 1.

A total of 16 states have enacted laws legalizing medical marijuana with California being the first in 1996 via statewide referendum. Rhode Island’s legislature overwhelmingly approved the use of medical marijuana in 2006.

El Representante Estatal Juan Candelaria (D-New Haven) dijo, “No puedo dejar de enfatizar la importancia de representacion equitativa en el gobierno, si es que queremos movernos adelante como comunidad.  Continare trabajando con mis colegas hasta que veamos un dia donde no necesitemos mas estudios socio-economicos porque nuestra comunidad estara haciendo a nivel de la poblacion general.”

El estudio revela que:

• En cuanto a la calidad de vida en general, el 28,3% dijo que al compararla a hace dos años atrás, era o bien “igual, pero pobre” o “peor”. Dos veces el porcentaje que en el 2007 (el 14%).
• En la encuesta de este año, el 13,8% dijo que su sueldo había bajado en el último año, mas de tres veces el número de personas que en el 2007 (3,5%).
• El total de personas que dijeron que estaban “sin empleo” o “buscando trabajo” era el 12% - más de dos veces el porcentaje que en el 2007 (4,8%).
• El número de personas con 3 empleos aumentó por cuatro veces al 2,9%; de un 0,7% en el 2007 y un 0,5% en el 2002.
• Sólo la mitad de los encuestados (el 49,9%) indicó estar en mejores condiciones económicas hoy que hace 2 años – un bajón significante del 79,4% de los encuestados en el 2000 y el 68,1% en el 2002.
• Entre las personas encuestadas propietarios de sus propios negocios, o con
• intenciones de abrir su propio negocio, menos de la mitad (el 42,4%) indicaron que sabrían donde acudir para buscar asesoramiento o apoyos financieros para poder abrir o crecer su negocio.

State Representative Juan Candelaria (D-New Haven) said, “I cannot stress enough the importance of equitable representation in government if we are to move forward as a community. I will continue to work with colleagues toward the day where we do not need socio-economic studies because the Latino community will be doing as well as mainstream society.”

The study revealed that:

• Regarding their overall quality of life, 28.3% said that when compared with two years ago, it was either “the same, but poor” or “worse.” That is double the percentage offering those responses in 2007 (14%).

• In this year’s survey, 13.8% said their salary declined over the past year, more than triple the number having that experience in 2007 (3.5%).

• Those who said they were “unemployed” or “looking for work” totaled 12% - more than double the percentage (4.8%) in 2007.

• The number of people holding 3 jobs quadrupled to 2.9%, from 0.7% in 2007 and 0.5% in 2002.

• Only half of all respondents (49.9%) indicated they are better off financially today than they were 2 years ago – down significantly from 79.4% who gave that response in 2000 and 68.1% in 2002.

• Among those who own their own business or would like to do so, less than half (42.4%) indicated they would know where to go for advice or financial help to begin or expand a business.

Approved by an 86-62 vote, the legislation replaces the death penalty with a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for capital offenses committed on or after the effective date of the act.

“I am pleased we were able to put this ineffective law behind us,” Candelaria said. “While the debate was passionate and filled with personal experiences from supporters and opponents, we managed to keep a civilized, fair and respectful dialogue.”

Rep. Candelaria also said the possibility always exists, as recent cases show, that innocent people may be executed.

Candelaria cited other reasons for supporting the abolishment of capital punishment:

• The death penalty is not a deterrent to committing murder. States such as Florida, Virginia and Texas where they have strong capital punishment laws would have a much lower crime rate if the death penalty were a deterrent.

• After all appeals have been exhausted, the death penalty ultimately ends up costing the Connecticut taxpayers more money than incarcerating the guilty with absolutely no chance of parole.

Capital punishment is morally wrong. When we execute a person even for a heinous crime, we become, in some ways, as morally corrupt as the people we execute.

“Passage of these bills reflects our commitment to helping small businesses grow and stay strong,” Candelaria stated. “Targeting worker training to employer needs, and other specific tools to promote economic development is all part of this comprehensive bill that I am delighted to support.”

The goal of the legislation is to jump-start job creation and foster long-term economic growth. Incentives for small business, cutting red tape and incentives for innovation, all addressed in the bill.

One of the key components of the legislation is the Small Business Express Package which will make $50 million/year available to small businesses through incentives, grants and loans.

Another vital component is aligning programs at vo-tech schools, community colleges and universities with high demand job needs of employers, including the state’s manufacturing technology companies.

Other components of the jobs bill include:

• Consolidating and increasing the tax credit for new hires
• Incentivizing investments in emerging technology (Angel Investors)
• Building innovation centers in key cities and investing in innovative ventures
• A second “First Five” program
• Cutting the business entity tax
• Streamlining the business permitting process
• Remediating old industrial sites/brownfields
• Computer upgrades to foster seamless communication between business and the state
• Workforce development, education and training
• Allowing the Airport Authority to designate new Development Zones
• Investments in roads and bridges
• Replenishing the Manufacturing Assistance Act (MAA)
• Main Street commercial centers improvement initiative

In addition, the legislature signed off on Jackson Laboratory’s plan to build a $1.1 billion research facility at the UConn Health Center campus in Farmington. The State of Connecticut will invest $291 million and Jackson Laboratory will raise the balance of $860 million for the project.

“Our investment in bioscience today will pay dividends for generations to come,” Rep. Candelaria said.

According to the state Department of Economic and Community Development (DECD), the project is expected to create over 660 positions at Jackson Laboratory in Farmington within 20 years. DECD estimates more than 4,600 bioscience jobs would be generated through spin-off companies, and another 2,000 would be added to local service and area retail stores. The project would yield more than 840 construction jobs as well.

HARTFORD — Legislators invoked their own immigrant roots Thursday in explaining their stands on a bill to allow undocumented immigrants to pay in-state tuition at public colleges and universities in Connecticut. The measure passed the state House of Representatives, 77-63.

Rep. William Tong, D-Stamford, whose parents fled a war-torn China, said that immigrants deserved a chance to make a better life and contribute to their new country.

"This bill is about who we are and who we ought to be," Tong said during the five-hour debate.

But opponent Rep. Selim Noujaim, R-Waterbury, described the hardships he faced as a young immigrant and became emotional when he recalled the day in 1971 when he arrived at John F. Kennedy Airport from his native Lebanon.

"No one came to me and said, 'I want to give you a break,' " Noujaim said.

With Thursday's party-line vote, supporters of the bill appeared to be in the home stretch of a drive that started at least six years ago. They came close in 2007, when a bill passed the House and Senate, but it received no Republican support and was vetoed by Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell.

This year the bill passed the legislature's higher education committee on a 11-8 vote, and supporters were not sure until recent days that they had the votes in the House. In the Senate, Majority Leader Martin Looney, D-New Haven, is a strong backer of in-state tuition and Gov. Dannel P. Malloy showed his support by introducing the bill.

"I believe we will pass it in the Senate," Looney said after the House vote.

The bill would allow undocumented students who attended high school for at least four years in the state, graduated and been accepted at a higher education institution to pay the lower tuition.

Students also would be required to file an affidavit with their school saying they were seeking legal status or would do so in the future if they became eligible.

Rep. Juan Candelaria, D-New Haven, led supporters in the debate, arguing that the students it would benefit had no control over their parents' decision to bring them illegally to the United States.

Democrats said that many of the students came to this country when they were young, do not know their home countries and consider themselves Americans. Some didn't even realize they were undocumented until they started thinking about college and their parents explained why it might not be possible.

"These students cannot pay the out-of-state rates," said Rep. Roberta Willis, D-Salisbury. "It just makes it beyond reach."

In-state tuition is typically about one-third the cost of out-of-state tuition.

Many opponents said they empathized with undocumented students, but were concerned about other students being edged out, especially at highly competitive schools such as the University of Connecticut.

"They might lose a seat that they have qualified for to someone who is not here legally," said Rep. Pamela Sawyer, R-Bolton.

Supporters estimate that about 250 students would benefit from the bill. Most would attend community colleges -- where space is available -- with only a few being able to afford UConn, even at the lower rate, they said.

Republicans also argued that the bill would cost too much at a time when the state could not afford it, but Democrats cited a report from the state's Office of Fiscal Analysis that said there would be no fiscal impact.

Ten states allow undocumented students to pay in-state tuition, while three states explicitly prohibit it and three prohibit such students from attending some or all of their public colleges and universities. Courts have upheld the legality of in-state tuition, although several cases are pending.

Hugh McQuaid Photo
Rep. Juan Candelaria, D-New Haven

Despite assertions by some lawmakers that a bill to offer in-state public college tuition rates to undocumented Connecticut students was unfair, the House of Representatives on Wednesday passed the measure with a 77-63 vote.

The bill would provide in-state rates to students without documentation of their citizenship who attended a fou-year high school in Connecticut and live in the state.

For much of the five-hour debate, Republicans objected to the measure on the grounds that it was fundamentally unfair. Several lawmakers who immigrated to the country stood to reinforce the point.

Rep. Selim Noujaim, R-Waterbury, began his remarks by joking through his Lebanese accent that his colleagues might not realize he is an immigrant. He spoke of the immigration process he undertook and his subsequent education.

 “No one offered me tuition break. I had to work for every single penny I earned. So here we are right now saying that we are going to offer students, and I know it was not the fault of their own, I understand that, we’re saying we’re going to offer them an opportunity that someone had to work very, very hard to accomplish,” he said.

Noujaim questioned whether that offering was fair.

Rep. Tony Hwang, R-Fairfield, acknowledged the merits of the bill, to allow bright, ambitious, and potentially economically beneficial students into the community. But he too had issues based on fairness. Legislators must recognize the law, he said, which says the students are not legally in the country.

Rather than pass a measure that gives them in-state tuition rates, the state should focus on fast-tracking the students to become citizens, he said.

“Ultimately I will vote against this bill out of respect for my parents and so many other great immigrants that came into this country, immigrants who contributed so much in making this country great,” Hwang said. “But those same immigrants made an earnest and sincere effort to attain American citizenship.”

But Rep. Roberta Willis, co-chair of the Higher Education Committee, said that many of the students who would be impacted by the bill don’t even know they are not citizens until they ask the parents for their Social Security card to take the PSATs.

“In every sense, these children and students are Connecticut residents,” she said. “They’ve resided in Connecticut for most of their lives; they’ve attended and graduated from Connecticut schools. Their parents work here and pay taxes here and in many cases they own property here.”

Willis said there is no logical basis for denying the students an opportunity for education. Since it is not the policy of this country to hold children responsible for the actions of their parents, even calling them “illegal immigrants” is incorrect, she said.

Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield, D-New Haven, agreed with Willis. Many people are acquainted and have no problem with undocumented neighbors until they learn they were born outside the U.S., he said. Holder-Winfield said he had trouble understanding why someone would turn around and decide that their neighbor suddenly does not deserve an opportunity for education.

He called some of the debate ridiculous, pointing to an assertion by one lawmaker that the bill’s proponent, Rep. Juan Candelaria, D-New Haven, was an immigrant. Candelaria was born in Puerto Rico, making him a U.S. citizen at birth. Holder-Winfield said the mistake is evidence that the opponents of the bill don’t fully understand the issue.

House Minority Leader Larry Cafero said the measure may create situations where undocumented students are accepted to competitive schools, taking a spot that could have been filled by a student who is a citizen. He said also that the measure would complicate budgetary considerations for universities.

Colleges generate more revenue from out-of-state students, who pay more for tuition, he said. For that reason when schools decide which students to accept they strike a careful balance between in-state students and out-of-state students, he said. Universities do this as a budgetary planning exercise, he said.

But Cafero said that, under the measure, undocumented students would apply for in-state rates after the decision already has been made to accept them to the school.

“This bill seems to ignore that process,” he said. “In many cases the decision to accept that student to the university is based on whether he or she is in-state or out-of-state.”

Willis said the process is not quite as precise as Cafero implied. For one, it’s unlikely that undocumented students will be bumping other students out of slots at competitive colleges. She used the University of Connecticut as an example.

She used 2,800 as a ball park figure of how many freshmen UConn may accept in a semester. Given that the school has no way of knowing how many of the students who applied will decide to actually attend, the admissions office might accept 3,500 students, she said. How many in-state or out-of-state students the university ends up with will depend on how many students decide to attend, she said.

In addition, she said the law would likely only impact between 250 and 300 students.

Republicans offered four amendments before the debate ended. One of those amendments would have required undocumented students to perform 250 hours of community service for every year the attended college at in-state tuition rates.

Rep. Chris Coutu, R-Norwich, whose wife emigrated from Lithuania, said that 250 hours seemed to him a minimal requirement for beginning to earn citizenship. But the House rejected all amendments to the measure.

The bill will now move to the Senate where its fate is not certain.

The state House of Representatives Thursday approved a bill to give undocumented residents in-state tuition at public colleges and universities, but advocates say they fear eligible students may be scared off by the requirement that they admit their illegal status.

The bill, approved 77-63 by the House, would require students to sign an affidavit confirming they live in the U.S. illegally and have applied for legal residency. Advocates say this formal admission will deter some students from coming forward, for fear that the affidavit would be used to deport them.

Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney, D-New Haven and a champion on the proposal, said the requirement may have a "chilling effect" on participation rates.

"But many will be willing to go forward with that concern in the back of their mind," he said.

Nationwide, 10 states provide in-state tuition for undocumented students and almost all require students sign an affidavit, according to a report from the National Conference of State Legislators. Suman Raghunathan, who tracks immigration policy for the State Legislators for Progressive Immigration Policy, said the affidavit requirement does deter some students.

"Folks are concerned to submit this," said Raghunathan.

"There is fear this will be used in the wrong way. There is a culture of silence about this among those that are undocumented," echoed Lorella Praeli, an undocumented student at the private Quinnipiac College who is an advocate for giving in-state tuition to illegal residents. "There are many who are afraid to come forward."

Praeli, who moved to New Milford from Peru at 10 years old, is not one of them. While testifying before state legislators in March, she said that she is "unafraid and unapologetic" for supporting the in-state tuition bill. But about a dozen other students who testified during that same public hearing said they were speaking for friends who were afraid to come forward.

Lee Melvin, UConn's Enrollment Director, said during a recent interview he's not sure who will have access to these affidavits. He also said he does not know how the university would respond if asked by federal officials for these affidavits.

But Praeli and Raghunathan said it's important to note that the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has never gone after undocumented students in 10 other states that have passed similar measures over the last decade.

"I have never heard of that information being transmitted," said Raghunathan.

An amendment proposed by Republican legislators that would have required school officials to transmit affidavits to federal officials did not make it to the floor Thursday.

College officials estimate there are only a small number of undocumented students enrolled in the state's public colleges and universities, where tuition for in-state students is about a third that charged students from out-of-state.

But Republican lawmakers debating the bill in the House said they worry this proposal would greatly increase enrollment of undocumented students and reduce opportunities for legal residents--particularly at UConn, which is at capacity. The Connecticut State University System and some of the community colleges have space available.

"This could bump some of the legal residents. That's a consideration we can't overlook and can't ignore," said Rep. Timothy LeGeyt of Canton, the ranking Republican on the Higher Education Committee.

"There's winners and there's losers," agreed House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk. "Remember folks, when someone gets in, someone gets denied."

Supporters of the bill disagreed.

"Why are we afraid of these people?" asked House Majority Leader J. Brendan Sharkey, D-Hamden. "You still have to complete for your place... in that institution of higher education."

Rep. Juan Candelaria, D-New Haven and vice-chairman of the Higher Education Committee, said charging higher tuition from undocumented students hurts the state in the end.

"There is no social benefit for charging these students higher tuition," he said. "It deprives the state of that student's intellectual capacity."

Republican lawmakers also said they are concerned that the state will subsidize the education of people whose parents do not pay taxes. An amendment that would require the affidavit to include that students could only receive in-state tuition if their parents are state taxpayers failed along party lines.

"I maintain there will be taxpayer expenses," LeGeyt said.

A recent report by the legislature's non-partisan budget office said the bill won't necessarily increase higher education costs. The report says the state colleges and universities can adjust the ratio of in-state to out-of-state student as needed to make up for the lower tuition for undocumented students.

The state spent $1.1 billion for higher education last fiscal year, according to a report from the State Higher Education Executive Officers, or $8,450 for each full-time equivalent student.

The bill now heads to the Senate, where final passage is expected. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has said he will sign the bill.

House Bill 6390 brings undocumented students a step closer to bringing their long fought battle for equal education opportunity to an end. Similar legislation was introduced in the General Assembly and failed in 2005. It was reintroduced in 2007 where it passed both chambers, but then Governor M Jodi Rell vetoed the bill.

Under the bill, a student must be a state resident, complete four years of high school at any educational institution in the state and provide an affidavit stating that an application has been filed to become a legal permanent resident in the state in order to qualify for in-state tuition. Undocumented students do not qualify for financial aid under this legislation.

“I am extremely pleased to see us moving forward with this legislation,” said Candelaria, who led the debate on the House Floor. “As I have stated before, this measure makes a lot of sense because nobody who wants to study should be denied that opportunity, regardless of their immigration status. Today, I celebrate with the students who have been penalized by no fault on their own. We are a step closer to finally making this happen.”

The legislation now moves to the Senate for further consideration. Governor Dannel P. Malloy has expressed his commitment to sign the measure into law if it reaches his desk.

“This issue was first brought forward by former State Representative Felipe Reinoso of Bridgeport,” Candelaria added. “Today, I’d like to recognize his efforts and thank him for all his hard work. I would also like to thank my legislative colleagues for their support and understanding.”

According to a Yale Law Clinic Community Impact Study, the merger would deprive New Haven of capital accumulated over 170 years, limit capital available to low- and moderate-income communities across Connecticut, reduce small business lending in New Haven, decrease affordable housing finance for low and moderate-income borrowers and cause significant job loss.

“As you know, New Alliance Bank has been a member of our greater New Haven community for just a few years, having taken shape after the unfortunate demutualization of New Haven Savings Bank. I am here tonight in opposition to this merger for numerous reasons--all of them, if the merger occurs, will hurt Hamden and New Haven, our local residents and businesses, and the entire State of Connecticut,” Rep. Lemar said.

“This merger will result in decreased rate competition, fewer local jobs, diminished customer service and far less ability for our community to grow. This deal is bad for our State under any analysis, and our community should not have to suffer this further theft of our once great community asset - New Haven Savings Bank - so that a poorly rated, out-of-State, corporate banking empire can be created,” Rep. Lemar added.

“New Haven has a great need for continued support for small business - this merger has the potential to squeeze off access to capital to the detriment of the local community,” Rep. Candelaria stated. “We all know how communities get hurt when big corporations take over small operations with failed promises of growth and fair practices.”

"This proposed merger is bad for the regional economy - It will cost jobs and restrict credit," Rep. Pat Dillon said. "I am proud to stand with members of the New Haven legislative delegation and the community against this merger."

“It is a new era in the history of our state, and I am delighted to be a part of such an exciting time where we begin to see an increasingly diverse group of professionals serving our great state. I congratulate Judge Espinosa on this important milestone and look forward to working together with my colleagues to ensure a quick confirmation of her nomination.”