For the People Act of 2021

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam President, I thank my colleague from Missouri, Senator Blunt, for his leadership on this issue.

We had the hearing and the markup in the Rules Committee. I think that we could tell from the debate that the amount of holes and misinformation that is contained within S. 1 is the reason that I call it the so-called For the People Act.

Ronald Reagan famously said that the nine most terrifying words in the English language are ``I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.'' This can be applied to many examples of what we do here.

What seems more pertinent, I think, now is this latest partisan attempt to federalize one of America's most sacred functions, and that is our elections. Advocates claim that this sweeping effort, which comes in the form of legislation ironically called For the People Act, is to get more people to vote. Let's be clear. Everyone--Republicans, Democrats, Independents--we all want to see more people voting. The good news is that we have already been doing that across the country and in my home State of West Virginia.

Remember, last year we were voting under a pandemic, under incredibly difficult situations for everybody. Our State of West Virginia ran a very successful election suited to our State. We had thousands more people vote in 2020 than they did in 2016. In fact, the total number of ballots cast in 2020 was more than any other election in West Virginia's history, with the exception of the 1960 election. The 1960 election, remember, was the Presidential election that President Kennedy won after he had a very successful and a pivotal victory in the primary in West Virginia as the first Roman Catholic running for President. More than 158 million ballots were cast in 2020. That is a 7-percent increase since 2016. This is under a pandemic.

Every State decided the best way to get maximum participation. Last November, every single State saw higher turnout rates compared to the previous Presidential election. If more people are, in fact, voting, what is this Democratic-proposed legislation really about? And that is where it is about the federalization of elections and election power grab. I believe it lacks credibility. It is really about a way to implement absurd and downright un-American provisions in the bill that prioritize power over the will of the people.

I am glad to say that some of my Democratic colleagues are finally acknowledging the concerns with this bill. During the Rules Committee markup, Republicans and Democrats offered a number of amendments, some of which were adopted on a bipartisan basis. That is what we are supposed to do--work it through committee. These amendments have been heralded by some of my Democratic colleagues as an example of how we can work together on this issue.

Despite the bipartisan amendments in the Rules Committee--despite this--the version that the majority leader may bring up for a vote does not include any of the amendments that were adopted during the markup even though they had bipartisan support. To me, that is a clear sign that the majority is not trying to cooperate in good faith but, rather, trying to ram through a partisan bill that will encroach on the States' abilities--my State's ability--to ensure a free and fair election and a well-attended election at the same time.

The legislation would strip States of their constitutional authority to run elections and allow the Federal Government to determine what is best.

It would ban voter ID laws, which are adopted in many States, mine included, which maintain the integrity of elections in my State and the majority of others. Quite frankly, I haven't heard one person in my State complain about having to take an ID to the polls or to submit an ID with their vote.

The bill would also force States to administer same-day voter registration--a cumbersome mandate that many States won't be able to comply with for dozens of reasons. In my State, it is internet connectivity. Many of our polling areas wouldn't be able to accept same-day registration because they can't connect, unfortunately, to the bigger system to find out if this person is fraudulent or not.

It would also require that States mandate the unpopular and dangerous practice of ballot harvesting, which is ripe for fraud. Now, I will tell you, some States have made ballot harvesting legal. Some States have same-day voter registration. Good for them. They decided what is good for their State through the constitutional duty of States to run elections.

Speaking of fraud, this bill would mandate absentee ballot boxes, drop boxes, and force county clerks to accept regular ballots filed in the wrong precinct without proof of residency, both of which leave the door open to voter fraud.

If that is not enough, if signed into law, West Virginia's e-voting system and others like it--this is the e-voting system that allows our Active military who are deployed overseas to be able to vote safely by their mobile phone, and the legislature opened that up to people with disabilities to be able to use an e-voting system. This bill would severely curtail that and negate it in many cases. That is an expansion of voting rights that this bill would take away.

This legislation would allow government funding of congressional campaigns, with small donations being matched with Federal funds. Now, we heard from our friend Senator Cruz in our committee. He talked about, if his contributions were matched for the first 3 months of this year, he would get millions of dollars, over $20 million of public financing for his campaign. I highly doubt my Democratic colleagues would want the Federal Government to help Senator Cruz in the financing of his campaign. As a matter of fact, he himself, Senator Cruz, said he doesn't want that at all either.

The bill also would make the FEC, the Federal Election Commission, which oversees our elections and our finances, which is now a neutral three Republicans, three Democrats on the Commission, as it always has been--it would make it into a partisan majority vote. Well, if you are going to be making decisions on my colleague from Florida's election or my election on financials, or the Presiding Officer's election, do we really want a political organization making those? Not when we have had a nonpartisan FEC for years and have enforced our campaign laws and put them above party politics. But remember, this is only about getting people to vote, so don't worry.

The disaster doesn't stop with politicizing the FEC; it would also remove the authority of States to draw district maps and would mandate how you do that. Our States can figure out how best--some of them have commissions. Some of them do it by the legislature. Some of them do it by the supreme court. Let's let the States make that decision.

I just think that the biggest demonstration of opposition to this bill has come from the West Virginia County Clerk's Association. It adopted a resolution in opposition to S. 1 that 54 of the 55 county clerks in my State signed. These are Republican and Democratic county clerks.

WVCCA Resolution Opposing the Passage of H.R. 1 & S. 1

Whereas, the United States Constitution recognizes the authority of the legislatures of each State to regulate the times, places, and manner of holding federal elections; and

Whereas, election administrators and county officials were not given an opportunity to provide input on the drafting of H.R. 1 and S. 1 prior to the introduction of the legislation, unlike previous bipartisan federal election reforms; and

Whereas, H.R. 1 and S. 1 preempt state law that currently restricts ballot harvesting for the prevention of fraud, by expressly providing that states ``may not put any limit on how many voted and sealed absentee ballots any designated person can return to the post office, a ballot drop-off location, tribally designated building, or election office''; and

Whereas, H.R. 1 and S. 1 preempt state law by mandating same-day registration, regardless of the severe lack of internet service and broadband in rural areas: an impossible feat in West Virginia; and

Whereas, Same-day registration provisions in H.R. 1 and S. 1 lack proper security protections, multiplied by the lack of internet capability in polling locations in West Virginia, which undermines the integrity of our elections by making it impossible for election officials to confirm any new voter's eligibility prior to them casting any ballot or from guaranteeing that no voter both registers and votes more than once in an election on Election Day; and

Whereas, H.R. 1 and S. 1 preempt state law by prohibiting requirements for physical proofs of identification for regular in-person and absentee voters, and requiring states to accept just a voter's signature affidavit as proof of eligibility and proper registration; and

Whereas, H.R. 1 and S. 1 preempt state law and adoption of voting systems by requiring decertification of current, federally certified voting systems, and forcing states to purchase new voting equipment--none of which currently comport with the most recently adopted voluntary voting system guidelines (adopted Feb. 2021 by EAC)--wasting millions of dollars in recent upgrades purchased with HAVA funding across West Virginia and requiring new manufacturing by vendors and purchases by counties to the tune of tens of millions of dollars in WV alone; and

Whereas, H.R. 1 and S. 1 creates multiple so-called ``private rights of action'' that would lead to election administrators being targeted for lawsuits all across the country for both real and imagined violations, and causing county clerks to spend more time defending themselves in court than preparing to make sure that elections are run smoothly and securely; and

Whereas, H.R. 1 and S. 1 places dozens of additional mandates on county clerks while providing no ongoing operational funding to fulfill the requirements, causing potential cuts in county budgets to law enforcement and public safety; and

Whereas, H.R. 1 and S. 1 preempt state law by forcing county clerks to accept regular--not provisional--ballots of voters who vote in the incorrect precinct, without sufficient evidence of eligibility or proof of residence; and

Whereas, H.R. 1 fatally contradicts the reliability and security of electronic transmission by permitting voters to cure signature deficiencies electronically (see Sec. 1621) but prohibiting UOCAVA, voters living with disabilities, and first responders called away for service from transmitting absentee ballots securely using extensively tested procedures and methods; and

Whereas, H.R. 1 and S. 1 lump dozens of state agencies and educational institutions into ``voter registration agencies,'' and requires them to integrate into an automatic voter registration system without regard to current systems, data collection practices, or security creating more opportunities for voters' registrations to be mishandled and mistransmitted, and likely resulting in security lapses for agencies currently not covered under the Critical Infrastructure designation of the Department of Homeland Security; and

Whereas, H.R. 1 and S. 1 preempt state law by mandating new dates for the early in-person voting period without regard to state-specific success and voter participation under current election calendars; and

Whereas, H.R. 1 and S. 1 preempt state law by requiring absentee ballot drop boxes and increasing security concerns for absentee ballots that currently do not exist under state laws: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, that the West Virginia County Clerk's Association opposes the passage of H.R. 1, S. 1, or any other legislation that impedes the state's ability to administer elections in an overreaching, one-size-fits-all approach out of Washington D.C.

Adopted the 10th day of June, 2021 in Canaan Valley, WV

Expires: June 2026 Connie Kaufman,

Barbour Co. Clerk. Roger Toney,

Boone Co. Clerk. Elaine C. Mauck,

Berkeley Co. Clerk. Sue Ann Rutherford,

Braxton Co. Clerk. Kim Barbetta,

Brooke Co. Clerk. Jean Simers,

Calhun Co. Clerk. Catee Slater,

Doddridge Co. Clerk. Jean Butcher,

Gilmer Co. Clerk. Robin Loudermilk,

Greenbrier Co. Clerk. George Foley,

Hancock Co. Clerk. John Spires,

Harrison Co. Clerk. Jacqueline C. Shadle,

Jefferson Co. Clerk. Cynthia S. Rowan,

Lewis Co. Clerk. John A. Turner,

Logan Co. Clerk. Phyllis Smith,

Cabell Co. Clerk. Connie Workman,

Clay Co. Clerk. Michelle Z. Holly,

Fayette Co. Clerk. Bud Fisher,

Grant Co. Clerk. Eric W. Strite,

Hampshire Co. Clerk. Gregory L. Ely,

Hardy Co. Clerk. Cheryl A. Bright,

Jackson Co. Clerk. Vera McCormick,

Kanawha Co. Clerk. Direl G. Baker,

Lincoln Co. Clerk. Julie Kincaid,

Marion Co. Clerk. Jan Pest,

Marshall Co. Clerk. Donald L. Hicks,

McDowell Co. Clerk. Lauren Ellifritz,

Mineral Co. Clerk. Donald J. Evans,

Monroe Co. Clerk. Robert Painter,

Nicholas Co. Clerk. Elise M. White,

Pendleton Co. Clerk. Melissa Bennett,

Pocahontas Co. Clerk. Brian Wood,

Putnam Co. Clerk. Brenda Wiseman,

Randolph Co. Clerk. Diana N. Cromley,

Mason Co. Clerk. Verlin T. Moye,

Mercer Co. Clerk. Larry Croaff,

Mingo Co. Clerk. Kimberly Nickles,

Morgan Co. Clerk. Michael E. Kelly,

Ohio Co. Clerk. Evelyn Davis,

Pleasants Co. Clerk. Linda Huggins,

Preston Co. Clerk. Danny Moore,

Raleigh Co. Clerk. Tracie McDonald,

Ritchie Co. Clerk. Charles B. White, Jr.,

Roane Co. Clerk. Georgianna Thompson,

Taylor Co. Clerk. Neil Archer,

Tyler Co. Clerk. Renick C. Booth,

Wayne Co. Clerk. Carol Haught,

Wetzel Co. Clerk. Mark Rhodes,

Wood Co. Clerk. Mary B. Merritt,

Summers Co. Clerk. Sherry Simmons,

Tucker Co. Clerk. Carol Smith,

Upshur Co. Clerk. Eva R. Green,

Webster Co. Clerk. Marolyn Baldrige,

Wirt Co. Clerk. Jewell Aguilar,

Wyoming Co. Clerk.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam President, they raise numerous grievances, many of which I have talked about. They talk about the voting machines they have right now, which they have spent a lot of money on, that would all be taken offline. You would have to fully replace all of that. They also fully reject the usurping of what is their constitutionally based responsibility to run elections safely, securely, and on time. So I appreciate the letter from our clerks and certainly understand their deep, deep concerns. The right to vote is a constitutional right, and on that, we are in agreement.

I got to go to a citizenship ceremony wherein 20 new citizens joined our country after having waited to get into our country. After becoming citizens, the best and most precious right they get is that right to vote. Yet S. 1 is merely a partisan power grab that includes all kinds of unrelated, harmful provisions. It strips the States of their authority to run their elections. To put it simply, States do not need the Federal Government to strip them of their authority and impose burdensome requirements to fix problems that do not exist. That is exactly what this bill does, and it is why the For the People Act does not live up to its name.

Thank you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source