[House Report 116-420]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
116th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 116-420
======================================================================
AUTHORIZING REMOTE VOTING BY PROXY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND
PROVIDING FOR OFFICIAL REMOTE COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS DURING A PUBLIC
HEALTH EMERGENCY DUE TO A NOVEL CORONAVIRUS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
_______
May 14, 2020.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. McGovern, from the Committee on Rules,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H. Res. 965]
The Committee on Rules to whom was referred the resolution
(H. Res. 965) authorizing remote voting by proxy in the House
of Representatives and providing for official remote committee
proceedings during a public health emergency due to a novel
coronavirus, and for other purposes.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 1
Background and Need for Legislation.............................. 2
Committee Consideration.......................................... 9
Committee Votes.................................................. 9
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations................. 20
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 20
Advisory Committee Statement..................................... 22
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation................... 22
Changes in Existing House Rules Made by the Resolution, as
Reported....................................................... 25
Dissenting Views................................................. 26
PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
This resolution authorizes remote voting by proxy in the
House of Representatives, provides for official remote
committee proceedings during a public health emergency due to a
novel coronavirus, and directs a study and certification of
remote technology to conduct remote voting in the House once
such a system is operable and secure. The resolution authorizes
the Speaker or her designee, in consultation with the Minority
Leader or his designee, to establish a 45-day period during
which a Member may authorize another Member to cast a vote on
their behalf or record their presence in the House at any time
that the Speaker is notified by the Sergeant-at-Arms, in
consultation with the Attending Physician, of a public health
emergency due to a novel coronavirus. This resolution lays out
the procedures for a Member to authorize another Member to vote
or record their presence on their behalf, to alter or revoke
such authorization, and for voting in the House Chamber while
this temporary system is in effect. The resolution further
authorizes remote proceedings in committees during the 45-day
covered period, for Members to participate remotely during such
proceedings and to be counted for purposes of establishing a
quorum, and any chair or committee empowered to issue and
authorize subpoenas to do so for return at a hearing or
deposition conducted remotely. The resolution provides
procedures for conducting remote hearings and markups and
requires committees to further conduct these proceedings in
accordance with regulations submitted for printing in the
Congressional Record by the chair of the Committee on Rules.
The resolution directs the chair of the Committee on House
Administration, in consultation with the ranking minority
member, to study the feasibility of using technology to conduct
remote voting in the House and to provide certification to the
House upon a determination that such operable and secure
technology exists. Finally, after such certification, the
resolution provides that the chair of the Committee on Rules
shall submit regulation in the Congressional Record and the
Speaker is then authorized to notify the House that Members may
cast their votes remotely during the public health emergency
period covered by the resolution.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
COVID-19 pandemic
On December 31, 2019, a new virus detected in Wuhan, China
was first reported to the World Health Organization (WHO).\1\
By early March, the new virus had spread around the globe and
the WHO officially declared the 2019 novel coronavirus, known
as COVID-19, to be a pandemic.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Rolling updates on coronavirus disease (COVID-19), World Health
Organization, last visited April 20, 2020. https://www.who.int/
emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/events-as-they-happen.
\2\Coronavirus: COVID-19 Is Now Officially A Pandemic, WHO Says,
NPR, Mar. 11, 2020, https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/03/
11/814474930/coronavirus-covid-19-is-now-officially-a-pandemic-who-
says.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 21, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) confirmed the first case of the novel
coronavirus in the United States\3\ and on February 29, 2020,
the first U.S. death from the virus was reported.\4\ Since that
time, in the U.S. over 1,400,000 cases have been reported and
over 80,000 people have died.\5\ These numbers continue to
rise. Globally, over 4 million cases and 300,000 deaths have
been reported.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\First Travel-related Case of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Detected in
United States, Centers for Disease Control, Press Release, Jan. 21,
2020, https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/p0121-novel-coronavirus-
travel-case.html.
\4\CDC, Washington State Report First COVID-19 Death, Centers for
Disease Control, Media Statement, Feb. 29, 2020, https://www.cdc.gov/
media/releases/2020/s0229-COVID-19-first-death.html.
\5\Johns Hopkins University, Coronavirus Resource Center, https://
coronavirus.jhu.edu/us-map.
\6\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the pandemic outbreak in the U.S., most
states and municipalities have taken action to slow the spread
of the virus, including ordering the closing of nonessential
businesses and issuing stay-at-home orders.\7\ At the federal
level, the White House and the CDC have issued social
distancing guidance and recommendations for a phased reopening
of states when conditions improve.\8\ Currently, over twenty
states, Washington, DC, Guam, and Puerto Rico have ongoing
stay-at-home orders and about 60 percent of the population, or
roughly 199 million Americans, are subject to stay-at-home
restrictions.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\More states issue stay-at-home orders as coronavirus crisis
escalates, Axios, Apr. 6, 2020, https://www.axios.com/states-shelter-
in-place-coronavirus-66e9987a-a674-42bc-8d3f-070a1c0ee1a9.html.
\8\Guidelines: Opening Up America Again, https://
www.whitehouse.gov/openingamerica/.
\9\A map of the US cities and states under lockdown--and those that
are reopening, Business Insider, May 8, 2020, https://
www.businessinsider.com/us-map-stay-at-home-orders-lockdowns-2020-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ordering Americans to stay home and shuttering nonessential
businesses, while necessary to slow the spread of the virus and
prevent the outbreak from overwhelming the health care system,
has resulted in an economic slowdown and an historic rise in
unemployment. The current unemployment rate in the United
States is estimated to be over 14 percent.\10\ More than 36
million Americans have applied for unemployment.\11\ This
economic crisis has fueled calls for states to begin easing
restrictions to allow Americans to return to work. So far, over
two dozen states have eased restrictions and allowed certain
businesses to reopen.\12\ However, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the
Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases, testified before that Senate Committee on Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions, warning that if states and
cities reopen prematurely there is a risk of spreading the
outbreak that ``will set you back, not only leading to some
suffering and death that could be avoided but could even set
you back on the road to try to get economic recovery.''\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\Department of Labor, Labor Force Statistics from the Current
Population Survey, https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000.
\11\Unemployment Insurance Weekly Claims, News Release, May 14,
2020, https://www.dol.gov/ui/data.pdf/.
\12\Supra note 9.
\13\Fauci tells Congress that states face serious consequences if
they reopen too quickly, CNN, May 12, 2020, https://www.cnn.com/2020/
05/12/politics/anthony-fauci-congress-hearing/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to this ongoing public health emergency and
economic crisis, Congress has acted swiftly to get resources
where they are needed most. Already, Congress has passed four
bills that have been signed into law: the Coronavirus
Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act, the
Families First Coronavirus Response Act, the Coronavirus Aid,
Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act, and the Paycheck
Protection and Healthcare Enhancement Act. In part, these bills
provide money for hospitals, establish a new loan program to
encourage small businesses to keep workers on the payroll, and
provide stimulus checks directly to Americans. These bills are
just the first in what will be many steps Congress takes as the
nation faces one of the most serious health and economic
emergencies in over a century.
Government institutions begin to work remotely
As social distancing and stay-at-home orders become the
norm to slow the spread of this pandemic, government
institutions in the United States, and throughout the world,
have been forced to rethink how they operate, including
establishing procedures to allow for remote voting to ensure
they are able to pass legislation required to respond to the
ongoing pandemic.
For example, over a dozen state legislatures and the
District of Columbia have instituted some form of remote voting
for members during the COVID-19 pandemic. Arizona, California,
Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Minnesota, New Jersey,
New York, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, and Washington
legislatures have established remote voting by telephone, video
conference, or other electronic means. In addition, Arkansas,
Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania have instituted remote
voting via proxy for their members.
Many other countries have also implemented remote voting in
their legislatures, including Argentina, Azerbaijan, Brazil,
China, Mexico, Norway, Philippines, Portugal, Romania, Spain,
Taiwan, and the European Union Parliament. In addition, the
legislatures of France and New Zealand have utilized remote
voting by proxy during this pandemic.
Legislatures are not the only branches of government
looking to adopt remote proceedings to continue operations
during the pandemic. The U.S. judicial system has also had to
revamp how it operates. ``Federal circuit, district, and
bankruptcy courts are utilizing multiple audio and video
conferencing technologies to host oral arguments, initial
appearances, preliminary hearings, arraignments, misdemeanor
sentencings, and other procedures remotely.''\14\ The National
Center for State Courts has recommended that state courts
restrict or end jury trials, generally suspend in-person
proceedings, and encourage or require teleconference and
videoconferences in lieu of hearings.\15\ In response, most
state courts have instituted such restrictions.\16\ Notably,
for the first time in its history, the United States Supreme
Court began hearing oral arguments by telephone in May.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\Courts Deliver Justice Virtually Amid Coronavirus Outbreak,
U.S. Courts, Apr. 8, 2020, https://www.uscourts.gov/news/2020/04/08/
courts-deliver-justice-virtually-amid-coronavirus-outbreak.
\15\ Coronavirus and the courts, National Center for State Courts,
https://www.ncsc.org/pandemic.
\16\ Id.
\17\The Supreme Court Will Hear Arguments by Phone. The Public Can
Listen In, NY Times, Apr. 13, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/13/
us/politics/supreme-court-phone-arguments-virus.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
House of Representatives' voting options during a pandemic
The pandemic is having a ripple effect across the United
States, impacting the lives and livelihoods of people in every
Congressional district. This is true for the Members
representing those districts as well. The operations of the
House of Representatives have been affected by social
distancing, isolation, and stay-at-home orders that have
captured every corner of the nation, making travel to, and
physical attendance in, the House Chamber difficult. Since the
start of this pandemic, numerous Members of Congress have
tested positive for COVID-19 or have been forced to quarantine
after exposure to the virus.
With the House needing to vote on critical legislation to
respond to the pandemic, while at the same time being faced
with the prospect that many Members may not be able to leave
isolation or travel during the pandemic, on March 23, 2020, the
House Committee on Rules Majority Staff released a report
entitled ``Majority Staff Report Examining Voting Options
During the COVID-19 Pandemic.''\18\ The report explored a
number of voting options and outlined several factors to be
considered before any remote voting plan can be adopted in
response to the limitations presented by the virus. The report
identified currently available voting options, including
passing legislation by unanimous consent, requiring Members to
return to the Capitol to take recorded votes while maintaining
social distancing, employing paired voting, and utilizing a
provisional quorum. The report also explored the potential to
provide for new rules to allow for enhanced unanimous consent
(increasing the number of Members required to object to a
unanimous consent agreement), proxy voting, and remote voting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\Majority Staff Report Examining Voting Options During the
COVID-19 Pandemic. Available at: https://rules.house.gov/sites/
democrats.rules.house.gov/files/StaffReport_VotingOptions .pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While every option presented unique advantages and
disadvantages, the report concluded that ``[t]here is currently
no perfect solution to allow absent Members to vote on the
floor. However, proxy voting is likely the best of the options
available under the circumstances.''\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\Id. at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the Committee on Rules Majority Staff report
analyzing voting options, on April 22, the Virtual Congress
Task Force was formed.\20\ This bipartisan Task Force,
comprised of the Majority and Minority Leaders, as well as the
Chairs and Ranking Members of the Committee on Rules and the
Committee on House Administration, examined ways Congress could
better adapt to emergencies like the coronavirus pandemic. This
examination, comprised of several meetings and discussions,
included not just remote voting options, but also remote
committee proceedings and the technology involved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Chairman McGovern Releases Statement on Bipartisan Task Force,
Press Release, Apr. 22, 2020, https://rules.house.gov/press-releases/
chairman-mcgovern-releases-statement-bipartisan-task-force.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Temporary remote voting by proxy during the pandemic
Based on the findings of the March 23 report, the work of
the Virtual Congress Task Force, and after consultation with
Members and outside experts, Rules Committee Chairman McGovern
introduced H. Res. 965, providing for a temporary voting system
permitting Members of the House of Representatives to vote
remotely by proxy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pursuant to
this resolution, any Member could provide specific instructions
for each vote to a fellow Member who is present in the chamber
and has been authorized to cast those votes on their behalf. A
Member casting a vote on behalf of another Member would be
required to have exact direction from the Member granting proxy
on how to vote and would have to follow that direction. There
would be no ability to grant a general proxy. Members granting
proxy would have to direct each and every vote, with the Member
casting the proxy vote acting more as a voting machine under
the direction of the Member granting proxy. In short, this
resolution calls for temporary, low-tech remote voting.
Importantly, proxy voting is not a novel concept in
Congress. The House permitted proxy voting in its committees
for many decades and the Senate still permits it in its
committees today. This resolution authorizes remote voting by
proxy that provides for a minimal and ministerial type of
delegation on the part of the Member granting proxy. Compared
to other remote voting proposals, this more conservative option
will allow Members to vote remotely by proxy in a secure way
and provides Members an opportunity to vote on critical COVID-
19 response legislation much more quickly.
Constitutionality of remote voting by proxy
The Constitution explicitly grants the House and Senate the
authority to make their own ``Rules of Proceedings.''\21\ In
addition, the Supreme Court has twice, in cases from the 1890s,
issued opinions that provide solid grounds to believe that the
House's establishment of remote voting rules is consistent with
its constitutional authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Art. I, Sec. 5, Cl. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649 (1892), the Supreme Court
ruled that challenges to the internal operation of Congress are
not justiciable in the federal courts.\22\ In United States v.
Ballin, 144 U.S. 1 (1892), the Court found that, while the
Constitution requires the presence of a majority--or quorum--of
the House to do business, the Constitution also leaves it to
the House to determine its own rules.\23\ The Court in Ballin
went on to say:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 143 U.S. 649 (1892).
\23\144 U.S. 1,5 (1892).
[Congress] may not by its rules ignore constitutional
restraints or violate fundamental rights, and there
should be a reasonable relation between the mode or
method of proceeding established by the rule and the
result which is sought to be attained. But within these
limitations, all matters of method are open to the
determination of the house, and it is no impeachment of
the rule to say that some other way would be better,
more accurate, or even more just. It is no objection to
the validity of a rule that a different one has been
prescribed and in force for a length of time. The power
to make rules is not one which once exercised is
exhausted. It is a continuous power, always subject to
be exercised by the house, and, within the limitations
suggested, absolute and beyond the challenge of any
other body or tribunal.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\Id at 5.
Any constitutional analysis should also examine the
rationale and context in which the House is utilizing its
expansive rulemaking authority to consider and implement H.
Res. 965. This resolution allowing for remote voting by proxy
is temporary and will operate only while there is a very
significant risk to public health. Arguably, not establishing
such a remote voting rule itself represents a risk to public
health and safety. If Members must travel to vote in the House
Chamber it is not just themselves who are put in danger--their
families, their staffs, and all of the people they encounter--
are unnecessarily endangered as well. In other words, the
remote voting by proxy plan established by H. Res. 965 does not
simply ensure the safety of the Members voting--it acts to
safeguard all the people with whom they have contact, both
during and after their travel. Such travel risks presented by
unnecessary travel is precisely why virtually all state
governors have implemented orders against non-essential
movement and interaction among the general populace; these
public safety policies make no less sense when they are applied
as well to Members of Congress.
Simply put, as Erwin Chemerinsky, the renowned
constitutional scholar and Dean of the University of
California, Berkeley School of Law, has written, ``[t]he
Constitution bestows on each House of Congress broad discretion
to determine the rules for its own proceedings . . . This
authority is expansive and would include the ability to adopt a
rule to permit proxy voting. Nothing in the Constitution
specifies otherwise.''\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Letter from Dean Chemerinsky to Chairman McGovern. May 13,
2020 (on file with the Committee).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given this analysis, remote voting by proxy is likely to
withstand constitutional scrutiny.
Study, determination, and certification of additional remote voting
technology
Remote voting by proxy is a necessary and immediately
feasible low-tech option allowing Members who are unable to be
in the House Chamber due to this pandemic to have their vote
cast by a Member who can be present. However, the immediate
feasibility of remote proxy voting does not mean that it
necessarily represents the final stage in remote voting. Remote
proxy voting is a good first step, but it still requires that
some Members must be present in the Chamber. As this pandemic
evolves, such presence--even by a small number of Members--may
not be feasible due to potentially worsening public health
concerns. Scientists have predicted that a second wave of the
virus could severely impact our nation in the coming months.
Robert Redfield, Director of the Centers for Diseases Control
and Prevention, said last month, ``There's a possibility that
the assault of the virus on our nation next winter will
actually be even more difficult than the one we just went
through.''\26\ Therefore, adopting additional remote voting
procedures incorporating more advanced technology may not only
be warranted, it may be required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ CDC director warns second wave of coronavirus is likely to be
even more devastating, Wash. Post, Apr. 21, 2020, https://
www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/21/coronavirus-secondwave-
cdcdirector/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure that the House is fully prepared to operate under
such a scenario, H. Res. 965 directs the chair of the Committee
on House Administration, in consultation with the ranking
minority member, to study the feasibility of using technology
to conduct remote voting in the House and to provide
certification to the House upon a determination that such
operable and secure technology exists. After the certification,
the Chair of the Rules Committee is directed to issue
regulations on the implementation of remote voting and the
Speaker is then authorized to notify the House that Members may
cast their votes remotely during this public health emergency.
By directing the study of remote voting technology, and then
laying out a procedure by which such technology may be
implemented, H. Res. 965 provides the House with the tools to
begin voting entirely remotely should the need arise.
Failure to adequately study and prepare to execute the use
of more advanced technology to vote entirely remotely during
this crisis would not only hinder the House from operating
should the situation deteriorate further.
Official remote committee hearings and markups
With trillions of taxpayer dollars being appropriated to
combat this virus, new programs being established to aid
workers and small businesses, and the Trump Administration
attempting to address the pandemic, the American people
deserve, and the Constitution requires, that the People's
representatives conduct oversight into our nation's response.
That means conducting oversight hearings.
Additionally, while Congress works to respond to this
pandemic, other vitally important business impacting the United
States, such as funding the government and providing for the
national defense, continues to require the House's attention.
That means conducting markups on these critical pieces of
legislation.
While hearings and markups have typically been held in-
person, just as with remote voting, there is no constitutional
requirement to do so--and our nation is dealing with anything
but typical circumstances. The same public health concerns that
make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for Members to
travel to the Capitol to vote are likewise present as an
obstacle to conducting in-person hearings and markups.
Failing to hold these committee proceedings is not an
option. Just as the millions of Americans have begun utilizing
technology such a videoconferencing to work remotely in
response to widespread stay-at-home orders, the work of the
People's House cannot be shuttered in a time of crisis.
Therefore, in addition to putting in place a system of
temporary remote proxy voting and authorizing the study,
certification, and implementation of technology to further
facilitate remote voting, this resolution also provides for the
ability of House committees to operate official proceedings
remotely.
Importantly, in preparation for holding these virtual
official proceedings, a number of committees have already held
virtual forums and briefings using videoconference technology.
For example:
The Veterans Affairs Committee held a full
committee, bipartisan virtual forum on homelessness
among veterans.
The Small Business Committee held a full
committee, bipartisan virtual forum on the
implementation of the CARES Act.
The Foreign Affairs Committee held a full
committee, bipartisan virtual briefing on
authoritarianism, disinformation, and good governance
with former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and
other experts.
The Education and Labor Committee held a
full committee, bipartisan virtual forum on responding
to the pandemic.
The Homeland Security Committee has held
seven virtual forums to hear from a range of experts,
including former FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate and
former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson.
The Natural Resources Committee has
livestreamed four forums on the coronavirus pandemic,
including the impact on longstanding environmental and
economic inequalities in our country and the federal
response to coronavirus in the U.S. territories.
Building on the lessons learned from these informal
proceedings, H. Res. 965 authorizes committees to begin holding
remote official proceedings, including hearings, markups, and
depositions. Allowing for these important official proceedings
to be conducted remotely ensures that the Legislative Branch
can continue to operate fully on behalf of the American people
during this public health crisis.
Conclusion
The United States is facing the worst pandemic since the
Spanish Influenza of 1918. With over a million reported cases,
tens of thousands of lives lost, and tens of millions of
Americans unemployed and struggling to make ends meet, the
House of Representatives must continue operating to address the
needs of the nation during this crisis. This means that, within
the authority granted to it by the Constitution, the House must
establish procedures to enable the People's representatives to
pass critical relief legislation and to conduct oversight of
our nation's response to this virus. The temporary remote
voting by proxy plan, procedures for remote official committee
proceedings, and study of the feasibility of technology to
facilitate further remote voting by Members laid out in this
resolution achieves these goals.
COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
The Committee on Rules met on May 14, 2020, in open session
and ordered H. Res. 965 favorably reported to the House by a
record vote of 8 yeas and 4 nays, a quorum being present.
COMMITTEE VOTES
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes
on the motion to report the legislation and amendments thereto.
A motion by Mr. McGovern to report the resolution to the House
with a favorable recommendation was agreed to by a record vote
of 8 yeas and 4 nays, a quorum being present. The names of
Members voting for and against follow:
Rules Committee record vote No. 303
Date: May 14, 2020
Motion to order H. Res. 965 reported favorably to the
House. Agreed to: 8-4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Nay
Mrs. Torres..................................... Yea Mr. Woodall....................... Nay
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Yea Mr. Burgess....................... Nay
Mr. Raskin...................................... Yea Mrs. Lesko........................ Nay
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Yea
Mr. Morelle..................................... Yea
Ms. Shalala..................................... Yea
Ms. Matsui...................................... Yea
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Yea
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee also considered the following amendments on
which record votes were requested. The names of Members voting
for and against follow:
Rules Committee record vote No. 271
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 1) offered by Mr. Woodall to ensure the
resolution doesn't go into effect until the Clerk of the House
certifies that a system is in place for the secure receipt and
validation of the designation of proxies by Members under this
resolution. Defeated: 4-6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... Yea
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... ............
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... ............
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 272
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 2) offered by Mr. Cole to require the
concurrence of the Minority Leader to designate a covered
period. Defeated: 4-7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... Yea
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... ............
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 273
Date: May 14, 2020.
Amendment (no. 3) offered by Mr. Cole to sunset the covered
period on June 30, 2020. The amendment also requires a two-
thirds vote to extend the covered period beyond June 30, 2020.
Defeated: 4-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... Yea
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 274
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 4) offered by Mr. Woodall to strike the
provisions allowing Members to record the presence of other
Members who designated them as their proxy. Defeated: 4-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... Yea
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 275
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 5) offered by Mr. Woodall to require a
report by the General Counsel on defedning proxy voting against
claims of unconstitutionality. Defeated: 4-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... Yea
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 276
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 6) offered by Mr. Burgess to require the
Committee on House Administration to submit a report analyzing
the accuracy and integrity of the votes cast by Members in the
House, including the votes cast by designated proxies under
this resolution, and shall include in the report a description
of any errors in the votes cast by designated proxies under
this resolution. The Committee on House Administration shall
submit this report not later than 30 days after the end of the
year. Defeated: 4-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... Yea
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 277
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 7) offered by Mr. Cole to limit measures for
which votes may be cast or presence recorded by proxy to
measures designated by the Speaker or her designee, in
consultation with the Minority Leader or his designee, as a
response to the COVID-19 pandemic; any vote related to a
question of the privileges of the House under rule IX; any vote
on a question unrelated to a specific measure or matter; or a
quorum call. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 278
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 8) offered by Mr. Woodall to prohibit a
Member from casting the vote or recording the presence of
another Member as a designated proxy with respect to any bill
or resolution considered under the suspension of the rules,
unless the bill or resolution is designated by the Speaker or
her designee, in consultation with the Minority Leader or his
designee, as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 279
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 9) offered by Mr. Cole to prohibit a Member
from casting a vote or recording the presence of another Member
as a designated proxy under this resolution with respect to any
bill or resolution which has not been reported by a committee
of the House. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee Record Vote No. 280
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 10) offered by Mrs. Lesko to prohibit a
Member from casting the vote or recording the presence of
another Member as a designated proxy under this resolution with
respect to any bill or resolution relating to impeachment,
censure, or contempt. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 281
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 11) offered by Mrs. Lesko to require the
Committee on House Administration to reduce the amount
available under the Members' Representational Allowance by the
amount which would have been paid from the Allowance for the
Member's travel expenses if the Member casts a vote or records
the presence of another Member by proxy or attends a proceeding
remotely at any time during that fiscal year. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 282
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 13) offered by Mr. Cole to require the
regulations under Section 6 in the resolution to include a
requirement that, not later than 24 hours prior to the vote or
quorum call involved, the Speaker notify Members that votes may
be cast or presence may be recorded by designated proxies. The
amendment also requires that these regulations include the
establishment of minimum periods of time for the casting of
votes and the recording of presence by designated proxies, and
a requirement for the use of contingency plans which may be
implemented in the event of failure of any technology to carry
out sections 1, 2, or 3. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 283
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 14) offered by Mrs. Lesko to limit the
number of proxies any Member can hold to two. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 284
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 15) offered by Mrs. Lesko to strike section
4 of this resolution, authorizing remote proceedings in
committees. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 285
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 16) offered by Mrs. Lesko to exclude the
Committee on Ethics and the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence from the provisions authorizing remote proceedings
in committees. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 286
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 17) offered by Mr. Cole to prohibit
committee members from recording their presence remotely.
Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 287
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 18) offered by Mr. Cole to strike ``to the
greatest extent practicable'' in the provision requiring
committees to ensure the ability of members to participate
remotely to the greatest extent practicable. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 288
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 19) offered by Mrs. Lesko to ensure the
guidance referenced in section 4(h) outlines how the committee
intends to address specific time zones of members; how the
committee intends to address technological limitations that may
exist that preclude members from full participation in remote
sessions; rules on decorum including attire and how the chair
would handle witnesses and members who go over their time
limit, and the muting of member microphones; and how the chair
plans to control platform access, including providing the
ranking member a list of those with participatory access to the
platform 24-hours in advance of the scheduled committee
meeting. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 289
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 20) offered by Mrs. Lesko to prohibit a
committee from conducting a markup remotely. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 290
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 21) offered by Mrs. Lesko to prohibit a
committee from taking depositions remotely. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 291
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 22) offered by Mr. Cole to create a point of
order against consideration of legislation reported by a
committee under any remote proceeding if the committee in
marking up or reporting the legislation violated any rule of
the House, the committee, or any provision of this resolution.
It shall not be in order to consider a rule or order that
waives the application of this point of order. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 292
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 23) offered by Mr. Cole to require in the
regulations referenced in section 4(h) that the chair of a
committee wishing to conduct remote proceedings publish
guidance in the Congressional Record on how the chair intends
to authenticate and validate member participation. Defeated: 3-
8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee Record Vote No. 293
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 24) offered by Mr. Woodall to require that
under the regulations referenced in section 4(h), the chair of
a committee conducting proceedings remotely shall ensure that
members of the committee have the right to offer a motion to
adjourn and have the right to offer a motion to postpone
consideration. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee Record Vote No. 294
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 25) offered by Mr. Woodall to require that
under the regulations referenced in section 4(h), the chair of
a committee conducting proceedings remotely shall ensure that
members of the committee have the right to demand words be
taken down. Defeated: 3-7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. ............ Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 295
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 26) offered by Mr. Woodall to require that
under the regulations referenced in section 4(h), the chair of
a committee conducting proceedings remotely shall ensure that
there is 7-day notice before any hearing and 24-hour
availability of such text of any matter to be considered by the
committee. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 296
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 27) offered by Mr. Woodall to require that,
under the regulations referenced in section 4(h), the chair of
a committee conducting proceedings remotely shall ensure that
members of the committee shall have the right to offer motions
to appeal the ruling of the chair. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 297
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 28) offered by Mr. Woodall to require that
under the regulations referenced in section 4(h), the chair of
a committee conducting proceedings remotely shall ensure that
members of the committee have the right to offer second degree
amendments, but may not require the pre-filing of amendments.
Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee Record Vote No. 298
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 30) offered by Mrs. Lesko to require the
chair to notify the Members of the committee of the
circumstances which required a recess to be declared within 24
hours of recessing committee proceedings. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee Record Vote No. 299
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 31) offered by Mr. Woodall to require that
under the regulations referenced in section 4(h), the chair of
a committee conducting proceedings remotely shall ensure that
Members have access to dedicated technical support from the
Chief Administrative Officer during the proceedings. Defeated:
3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 300
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 32) offered by Mr. Cole to require
committees to include in any report filed with the House with
respect to any proceeding conducted remotely a description of
any issues arising from conducting the proceeding remotely.
Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 301
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 33) offered by Mrs. Lesko to prohibit any
committees from conducting remote proceedings until the
Committee on House Administration has submitted to the House a
plan under which committees will be able to make greater use of
other facilities in the United States Capitol Complex to
conduct hearings and markups in person. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules Committee record vote No. 302
Date: May 14, 2020
Amendment (no. 34) offered by Mr. Woodall to amend section
5 to only require the chair of the Committee on House
Administration, in consultation with the ranking minority
member, to study the feasibility of using technology to conduct
remote voting in the House. Defeated: 3-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Majority Members Vote Minority Members Vote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hastings.................................... ............ Mr. Cole.......................... Yea
Mrs. Torres..................................... Nay Mr. Woodall....................... Yea
Mr. Perlmutter.................................. Nay Mr. Burgess....................... ............
Mr. Raskin...................................... Nay Mrs. Lesko........................ Yea
Ms. Scanlon..................................... Nay
Mr. Morelle..................................... Nay
Ms. Shalala..................................... Nay
Ms. Matsui...................................... Nay
Mr. McGovern, Chairman.......................... Nay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause 2(b)(1)
of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee made oversight findings and recommendations that are
reflected in this report.
PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee establishes the
following performance related goals and objectives for this
legislation:
This resolution authorizes remote voting by proxy in the
House of Representatives, provides for official remote
committee proceedings during a public health emergency due to a
novel coronavirus, and directs a study and certification of
remote technology to conduct remote voting in the House once
such a system is operable and secure. In doing so, this
resolution ensures that the House can function to its full
constitutional and legislative ability while taking the
necessary precautions to protect against the public health
threat posed by a novel coronavirus. The resolution also
emphasizes that the authority for Members to remote vote by
proxy and for committees to conduct remote proceedings is
temporary and limited to addressing the current public health
crisis. The resolution authorizes the Speaker or her designee,
in consultation with the Minority Leader or his designee, to
establish a 45-day period during which a Member may authorize
another Member to cast a vote on their behalf or record their
presence in the House at any time that the Speaker is notified
by the Sergeant-at-Arms, in consultation with the Attending
Physician, of a pandemic emergency due to a novel coronavirus.
But also, the resolution provides that if during that 45-day
period, the Speaker or her designee receive further
notification by the Sergeant-at-Arms, in consultation with the
Attending Physician, that the public health emergency due to a
novel coronavirus is no longer in effect, then the ability of a
Member to vote or record their presence remotely by proxy is
terminated as well as the authorization for remote committee
proceedings.
To ensure that Members' votes are cast accurately, the
resolution lays out the procedures for a Member to authorize
another Member to vote or record their presence on their
behalf, to alter or revoke such authorization, and on voting in
the House Chamber while this temporary voting system is in
effect. Importantly, prior to casting a vote, a Member
designated as a proxy must obtain exact instruction from the
Member wishing to vote remotely by proxy. A Member whose vote
is cast or whose presence is recorded by a designated proxy
shall be counted for the purpose of establishing a quorum. The
resolution also clarifies that if a Member has designated
another Member as their proxy, but the Member granting proxy
then casts their own vote in person, that Member shall be
considered to have revoked their proxy designation.
The resolution further authorizes remote proceedings in
committees during the 45-day covered period, for Members to
participate remotely during such proceedings and to be counted
for purposes of establishing a quorum, and any chair or
committee empowered to issue and authorize subpoenas to do so
for return at a hearing or deposition conducted remotely. The
resolution authorizes committees to hold official hearings,
markups, and depositions remotely. Like the authorization
allowing for remote proxy voting during the covered period, if
during that 45-day period, the Speaker or her designee receive
further notification by the Sergeant-at-Arms, in consultation
with the Attending Physician, that the public health emergency
due to a novel coronavirus is no longer in effect, then the
ability of committees to hold remote official proceedings is
also terminated. This temporary authorization during a pandemic
will allow committees to consider important legislation as well
as conduct their constitutional oversight duties.
Finally, the resolution directs the chair of the Committee
on House Administration, in consultation with the ranking
minority member, to study the feasibility of using technology
to conduct remote voting in the House and to provide
certification to the House upon a determination that such
operable and secure technology exists; after such certification
the chair of the Committee on Rules shall submit regulations in
the Congressional Record and the Speaker is then authorized to
notify the House that Members may cast their votes remotely
during the public health emergency period covered by the
resolution. This study, determination, certification, and
implementation of remote voting technology ensures that were
the pandemic situation to further deteriorate, making even a
limited presence of Members in the House Chamber extremely
difficult, the House will still be able to vote on critical
legislation.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT
No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this
legislation.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1: Authorization and time period for remote voting by proxy
Authorization--Authorizes the Speaker, in consultation with
the Minority Leader, to designate a 45-day period during which
Members may vote or record their presence remotely by proxy in
the House (not the Committee of the Whole), after the Speaker
receives notification from the Sergeant-at-Arms, in
consultation with the Attending Physician, that a pandemic
emergency due to a novel coronavirus is in effect.
Extension--Allows the Speaker, in consultation with the
Minority Leader, to extend the authority for an additional 45
days if the Sergeant-at-Arms, in consultation with the
Attending Physician, notifies the Speaker that the public
health emergency due to a novel coronavirus remains in effect.
Early termination--Terminates the 45-day period early if
the Speaker is further notified by the Sergeant-at-Arms, in
consultation with the Attending Physician, that the pandemic
emergency due to a novel coronavirus is no longer in effect.
Section 2: Designating proxies
Signed letter--Requires a signed letter submitted to the
Clerk from any Member who wishes to vote by proxy naming the
Member who is authorized to serve as their proxy. The letter
may be submitted in electronic form, including email. This
letter will be used by the Clerk to certify that a Member
serving as proxy has the authority to cast votes on behalf of
the Member voting remotely by proxy. It is the responsibility
of the Members involved to ensure that separately provided
voting instruction, detailed below, is followed.
Altering or revoking proxy--Allows Members to submit
further signed letters to the Clerk to alter or revoke their
proxy, and automatically revokes the proxy designation if a
Member votes in-person. These further letters may also be
submitted in electronic form, including email.
Notification--Requires the Clerk to notify the Speaker,
Majority Leader, Minority Leader, and the Member designated
(and in the case of an alteration, the Member formerly
designated) as proxy of any designation, alteration, or
revocation of proxy.
Proxy designation limitation--Limits the number of proxy
designations a Member may hold to 10 at a time.
List of proxy designations--Requires the Clerk to maintain
and keep updated a list of all proxy designations, alterations,
and revocations and to make that list publicly available
electronically, including available during any vote.
Section 3: Voting process
Yeas and nays--Provides that if a Member requests the yeas
and nays, a recorded vote, or makes a point of no quorum under
clause 6 of rule XX, the yeas and nays will be considered as
ordered (rather than the chair first determining there is
sufficient support), preventing the need for large numbers of
Members to gather in the chamber to ensure a sufficient number
to support their request.
Indicating proxy status--Requires Members who cast votes on
behalf of another Member to indicate that the vote is ``by
proxy'' on a ballot card.
Quorum--Provides that a Member whose votes are cast by
proxy are counted for the purpose of establishing a quorum in
the House.
Proxy vote instructions--Requires that a Member voting on
behalf of another Member obtain an exact instruction with
respect to the specific vote or quorum call, to cast that vote
pursuant to that instruction, and is required to seek
recognition from the Chair to announce the exact instruction
they received. If a Member casting a proxy vote does not
receive instructions from the Member granting the proxy then
that Member may not cast the vote.
Section 4: Remote committee proceedings
Authorization--Provides that during the 45-day period
designated by the Speaker under section 1, notwithstanding any
rule of the House or its committees, committees may conduct
proceedings (hearings, markups, or any other official business)
remotely pursuant to the provisions of section 4 and the
regulations authorized by section 4, and those proceedings will
be considered as official proceedings. This authorization does
not prevent committees from being able to use official
resources to hold unofficial remote forums and roundtables.
Remote participation--Allows committee Members to
participate remotely during in-person committee proceedings and
state that the committee must, to the greatest extent
practicable, ensure that Members can participate remotely. This
authorization does not mean that a committee is prohibited from
holding a remote proceeding unless all Members are able to
participate remotely or that a committee is required to procure
technology for members to participate remotely. Instead, it
requires committees to provide Members who wish to participate
remotely the opportunity to do so, but anticipates that in rare
circumstances technological issues may prevent committees from
ensuring remote participation.
Voting--Provides that committee Members may vote or record
their presence remotely.
Quorum--Provides that committee Members participating
remotely shall be counted for the purposes of establishing a
quorum.
Witnesses--Allows witnesses to appear remotely.
Designating ``place''--Allows the committee chair to
designate the ``place'' of a committee proceeding, satisfying
the requirement of clauses 2(g)(3) and 2(m)(1) of rule XI, as
being conducted remotely.
Committee reports--Allows that reports of committees
(including those filed as privileged) may be delivered to the
Clerk in electronic form and written and signed supplemental,
additional, and dissenting views may also be filed in
electronic form with the clerk of the committee.
Limitations on business meetings--Requires that before a
committee holds a business meeting remotely or permits remote
participation in a business meeting for the first time, a
majority member of a committee must first submit a letter
signed by a majority of the members of the committee for
printing in the Congressional Record notifying the Speaker that
the committee has complied with regulations for remote
committee proceedings submitted for printing in the
Congressional Record by the Rules Committee chair referenced in
subsection (h) and that the committee is prepared to conduct a
remote business meeting and permit remote participation during
that meeting. Importantly, ensuring members can participate
remotely pursuant to section 4(a)(2) does not mean that
committees must allow remote participation in a markup if they
have not completed the requirements found in the regulations
referenced in subsection (h).
Remote proceedings--Provides that remote participants shall
not be considered absent; that during remote committee
proceedings the chair may declare a recess to address any
technical difficulties; and that the requirement that the
result of any recorded vote be made available by the committee
in its offices (clause 2(e)(1)(B)(i) of rule XI) shall not
apply.
Submitted or written documents--Allows for copies of
motions, amendments, measures, or other documents submitted to
the committee electronically pursuant to the regulations
referred to in subsection (h) to satisfy any submission
requirement for such documents under the rules of the House or
its committees.
Amendment consideration--Provides that during a remote
business meeting the committee may manage the consideration of
amendments pursuant to regulations referred to in subsection
(h).
Witness counsel--Permits the attendance of counsel for any
witness appearing remotely before a committee in accordance
with regulations referred to in subsection (h).
Witness oaths--Allows an oath to be administered to a
witness remotely.
Transparency for meetings and hearings--Provides that any
remote committee meeting or hearing conducted in accordance
with regulations referred to in subsection (h) shall be
considered open to the public.
Subpoenas--Provides that any committee or chair empowered
to authorize and issue subpoenas may authorize and issue
subpoenas for return at a hearing or deposition conducted
remotely. During this period, authorized and issued subpoenas
may be signed electronically and the Clerk may attest and affix
the seal of the House to such subpoenas electronically.
Executive session--Prohibits a committee from conducting a
closed or executive session proceeding remotely. If during a
remote proceeding a motion by a Member to go into closed or
executive session is adopted, then the chair shall recess the
meeting with respect to such matter until the proceeding can be
reconvened in person. This prohibition on remote closed
proceedings does not apply to the Committee on Ethics.
Regulations--Subsection (h) provides that this section
shall be carried out in accordance with regulations submitted
for printing in the Congressional Record by the Rules Committee
chair. Consistent with past grants of regulatory authority to
the chair of the Committee on Rules, this authority is not
limited to a single submission of regulations.
Application--``Committee'' includes select committees and
subcommittees.
Section 5: Study on remote participation
Study and certification of remote voting technology--
Requires the chair of the Committee on House Administration, in
consultation with the ranking minority member, to study the
feasibility of using technology to conduct remote voting in the
House and to provide certification to the House upon a
determination that such operable and secure technology exists.
Implementation of remote voting technology--Following
certification by the chair of the Committee on House
Administration, the chair of the Committee on Rules, in
consultation with the ranking minority member, will submit
regulations for printing in the Congressional Record that
provide for implementation of remote voting in the House. After
submission of these regulations, the Speaker is authorized to
notify the House that Members may cast their votes or record
their presence remotely.
Section 6: Regulations
Remote voting regulations--Provides that sections 1, 2, and
3 (remote voting by proxy) shall be carried out in accordance
with regulations submitted for printing in the Congressional
Record by the Rules Committee chair, to the greatest extent
practicable. Consistent with past grants of regulatory
authority to the chair of the Committee on Rules, this
authority is not limited to a single submission of regulations.
CHANGES IN EXISTING HOUSE RULES MADE BY THE RESOLUTION, AS REPORTED
In compliance with clause 3(g) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the Committee finds that this
resolution does not propose to repeal or amend a standing rule
of the House.
DISSENTING VIEWS
The American people expect its elected Representatives to
lead by example and continue to govern during these times,
especially when we ask health care workers, grocery store
clerks, and other front-line workers to keep going to work
every single day. At the same time, we also recognize that
changes to the way the House normally operates during a
pandemic are appropriate. But a pandemic does not mean we
should throw out 230 years of House practice and the
Constitution. In fact, our founders faced many of the same
questions we face today when they drafted the Constitution.
Travel was long and dangerous, especially during a time of war.
Proxy voting is something they easily could have implemented,
and its omission leads us to conclude that they chose to draft
the Constitution without providing for proxy voting. They knew
the value of a Congress--a coming together of people and
ideas--and therefore demanded physical presence to further us
as an institution.
Before even addressing the Majority's proposal, it is
critical to understand the process that led to this potentially
flawed and deficient product. When Democrats were entrusted
with the Majority in 2019, they promised things would be
different. They instituted rules changes that would ensure
regular order, such as ensuring committee hearings and markups
before legislation would be considered by the Rules Committee
and the House.
While these provisions made for good sound bites, the
Majority has waived the rule requiring a markup on 5 bills and
has foregone hearings on 7 House resolutions so far this
Congress. And it is deeply disappointing that on such a
fundamentally important piece of legislation, which changes how
this House has operated for more than 230 years, the Majority
has yet again failed to hold proper hearings and take testimony
from witnesses. To be fair, this Committee did hold one
unofficial, virtual roundtable discussion, limited to one hour,
where Members were asked to limit themselves to one question a
piece from two panelists. Such a consequential change certainly
merits more than one hour of discussion and deserves hearings
in all committees that would be impacted, especially the
Committee on House Administration and the Committee on the
Judiciary. While we appreciate the Committee holding this
hearing and markup, they are certainly not designed to find
common ground and develop a bipartisan proposal. As Chairman
McGovern once stated ``. . . usually when you have a lousy
process, you have a lousy bill.'' The process for consideration
of this resolution has certainly been lousy and it is apparent
in the product, which is riddled with both serious
constitutional concerns and practical implementation issues.
We must make one point abundantly clear: this measure fails
to pass constitutional muster in every regard. While the
Constitutional limitations on the power of Congress may be
inconvenient to some with a desired policy outcome in mind, it
is, nevertheless; the fundamental question that every Member of
Congress must ask before casting a vote on this or any measure.
The Majority has failed to provide sufficient Constitutional
basis for this substantial change to the core functions of
Congress, and as such, jeopardizes the legitimacy of the
passage of any future legislation. There are constitutional
options before the House, and should the Majority alter their
partisan and short-sighted crusade, we would gladly explore
these options with them in a bipartisan and expeditious manner.
Article I of the U.S. Constitution demands physical
presence for Congress to perform core legislating functions.
Physical presence is required for Congress to establish a
``quorum'' to conduct business (Art. 1, Sec. 5, Cl. 1); and in
regards to ``meeting'' (Art. I, Sec. 4, Cl. 2), ``assembling''
(Art. I, Sec. 4, Cl. 2), and ``attendance'' (Art. I, Sec. 5,
Cl. 1). The Constitution grants each Member the right to
request for ``the yeas and nays''' and requires a recorded vote
on any question ``at the desire of one fifth present'' (Art. 1,
Sec. 5, Cl. 3). While the Majority may have novel arguments
regarding the re-definition of presence, such an argument is
inconsistent with the text of the Constitution and commonsense.
In 1892 the Supreme Court ruled in U.S. v. Ballin that the
House of Representatives lacks the authority to set rules that
ignore constitutional restraints, the relevant restraint in the
matter before us being that of physical presence.
The Constitution provides that ``a majority of each
[house) shall constitute a quorum to do business.'' In
other words, when a majority are present the house is
in a position to do business. Its capacity to transact
business is then established, created by the mere
presence of a majority, and does not depend upon the
disposition or assent or action, of any single member
or fraction of the majority present. All that the
Constitution requires is the presence of a majority,
and when that majority are present the power of the
house arises'' (emphasis added).
As we referenced above, the Constitution requires Congress
to assemble at least once a year and, as required, Congress has
consistently physically gathered in a single location to
conduct business. We can turn to The Federalist Papers for more
color on this requirement. In Federalist No. 14, James Madison
argued that ``the natural limit of a republic is that distance
from the centre which will barely allow the representatives to
meet as often as may be necessary for the administration of
public affairs.''
In Federalist No. 53, Madison, in arguing in favor of two-
year terms for Members of the House, noted that ``[t]he
distance which many of the representatives will be obliged to
travel, and the arrangements rendered necessary by that
circumstance, might be much more serious objections with fit
men to this service, if limited to a single year, than if
extended to two years.''
The Constitution and the words of the founders leave no
room to contemplate a scenario other than Members of Congress
assembling and meeting in person in one location. There is
simply no room in the constitutional confines of our government
for Members of the House of Representatives to meet in multiple
or virtual locations.
For those who find these arguments unpersuasive or the call
to preserve the integrity of the Constitution too theoretical
to demand our fidelity, we urge them to carefully consider this
warning: if any Member casts their vote on passage of a measure
without being physical present in the chamber, it would raise
the specter of illegitimacy of the final action taken by the
House. A Member who disagrees with a potential change to the
House rules could attempt to challenge the change in the
courts, or a member of the public who is adversely affected by
any law while the House is operating remotely could similarly
allege that the law was not instituted through constitutional
means. Both scenarios would damage the House as an institution
and depending on the legislation in question, have far-reaching
economic consequences.
The confines of the Constitution are not so rigid as to
prevent Members of this body from finding a path forward that
would allow for safe and effective governing. We urge the
Majority to embrace Constitutional certainty and abandon this
flawed proposal.
In addition to the serious Constitutional challenges
contemplated by this resolution, it has the potential to
fundamentally alter how the House operates. While the
resolution only addresses proxy voting in the context of the
current pandemic, relaxation of what it means to be
incapacitated as an institution is a legitimate concern. So,
while this proposal may be confined to the current crisis, it
opens the door to allowing proxy voting in other
circumstances--like fly-in days--because of the inconvenience
of travel or weather-related incidents.
Proxy voting fundamentally undermines the role of Congress.
Congress is derived from Latin words meaning ``a coming
together of people'' and ``to meet with; to fight with.'' Proxy
voting removes that personal element of Congress. Instead of a
free-flowing debate and exchange of ideas, proxy voting further
serves to entrench one's own view and eliminates the
interaction with different ideas.
Some have argued that the polarization of our Congress is
due in no small part to Members spending less time working out
differences in face-to-face settings and failing to develop
personal relationships with those across the aisle. If that is
the case, the turn to proxy voting will only further exacerbate
the polarization of Congress to the detriment of the American
people.
Beyond the Constitutional and institutional implications,
there are practical concerns with the Majority's proposal.
These could have been further explored through a series of
hearings; however, the Majority seems determined on pushing
this proposal through as expeditiously as possible.
Rather than providing Members certainty and clarification,
the Majority's resolution instead generates a series of
questions about how their proxy voting scheme will operate:
questions that must be answered before a monumental proposal
like this should be implemented. The Electronic Voting System
(EVS) underwent three years of testing before it was fully
implemented; yet, the Majority seems to think proxy voting can
be implemented with the flip of a switch. In discussions with
the Office of the Clerk, we remain concerned about the ability
and of the Clerk's office to authenticate and certify the
grantor of the proxy in real time.
Additionally, there are a series of questions generated by
introduction of a proxy like addressing the situation of a
Member who is unable to unable to find a willing proxy. This
may occur for a multitude of reasons, including a Member taking
a different position than their potential proxy. Beyond this,
since House Rules only prescribe a minimum time for voting, it
is unclear how the Majority's proposal would ensure that all
Members have an opportunity to inform their proxy on how they
wish to vote before the Chair closes a vote, especially on an
unanticipated vote.
Instead of moving forward with this resolution, the
Majority would do well to use any of the many existing tools at
the House's disposal. We note at least three potential
alternatives that would allow the House to proceed with
business, while not trampling the Constitution or the
institution.
First, the House could use the approach it did during the
1918 Spanish Flu, where the House continued to operate by
unanimous consent. The Majority should truly consider what
legislation will be considered under their proxy voting scheme.
We hope it will continue to be legislation that is broadly
bipartisan, which has both Senate and White House support. In
that scenario, it makes sense that unanimous consent is the
appropriate approach to take. If, however, the Majority is
intending to undertake partisan legislation that has no chance
of becoming law, their current approach, which seeks to
leverage their slim majority, makes sense.
Second, the House could continue to operate as it did for
the vote on the CARES Act. This would maintain appropriate
safeguards recommended by both the Office of the Attending
Physician and the House Sergeant-at-Arms to ensure the safety
of all Members and staff. Additional precautions could be
implemented, if desired, to further protect the safety of all
Members and staff.
Third, the House could avail itself of Rule XX, clause 5,
which provides for the establishment of a provisional quorum in
the event of a catastrophic event. The rule specifically
contemplates use of this procedure in the event of
``catastrophic circumstances involving natural disaster,
attack, contagion, or similar calamity rendering
Representatives incapable of attending the proceedings of the
House'' (emphasis added). This rules change was implemented
after the 9/11 attacks on a bipartisan basis four years after
consideration, not one month. Any of these tools should be used
before creating more extraordinary, constitutionally untested
processes.
The second major provision included in this resolution is
more notable for what is absent from it than from what it
contains. While this resolution purports to provide committees
with the authority to operate remotely, it provides no specific
details on how committees are to accomplish this objective. It
is critical that many of the real technological challenges are
addressed prior to implementation of any remote operations by
committees.
Serious implementation challenges exist to ensuring that
committees are able to function remotely, first and foremost
being the issue of cybersecurity. The House is subject to more
than 1.6 million cyberattacks per month and currently, there
are no House authorized products which would allow committees
to meet securely. Many of the existing platforms that
committees have used thus far have significant vulnerability
issues that could be exploited, should the Majority continue
down this path.
Additionally, this resolution makes no effort to ensure the
protection of the rights of the Minority or hold the chairs of
committees accountable for adhering to the rules of the House
and guaranteeing equal participation by all committee members.
Under this resolution, Members of Congress wishing to exercise
their constitutional responsibilities can only do so to the
extent allowed by the chair. It remains troubling that there
are no details as to how remote committee operations will
function under this resolution. How a chair will dispense of
motions, how a chair will ensure any member retains the right
to offer amendments at any time, how the ruling of the chair
may be appealed--these are just a few of the questions that
have gone unanswered by the Majority. We are concerned that
this resolution not only consolidates for the chair the
legislative power belonging to all members of the committee,
but provides no recourse or mechanism whereby committee
chairmen are held accountable to their fellow members and the
American people for actions that disserve democracy and violate
the rules of the House. It should be noted that we have raised
on numerous occasions specific instances where this Majority's
chairmen have failed to follow their own committee rules and
the rules of the House. Although it comes as no surprise since
this Majority seems to be more interested in expediting its
partisan liberal agenda than preserving the integrity of the
legislative process and any semblance of bipartisanship.
Beyond these concerns, there are practical challenges that
must be addressed. In a remote committee markup, how will
amendments be distributed? Given that some committees have time
zone differentials of 22 hours, how will committee activities
be scheduled? How will a committee ensure all Members can
attend and participate when broadband internet access,
especially in rural and remote areas, can be limited? These
questions deserve more than a cursory glance in a Rules
Committee hearing and markup.
As if the first four sections of this resolution didn't go
far enough to upend the integrity and transparency of the
proceedings of this body, Section 5 places the future of remote
voting in the House of Representatives in the hands of one
individual: the chair of the Committee on House Administration.
The gravity of this language cannot be overstated. Remote
voting fundamentally alters what it means to be the People's
House and to make such a lasting and catastrophe change through
a report issued by one person should cause every American
pause. Transparency, vote integrity, and equal participation
cannot exist if the House moves from a physical location to the
virtual ether. We shudder to think of the implications of this
move on an already hyper-partisan environment. Bipartisanship--
the overcoming of barriers--relies on the organic forming of
relationships through physical human connection and
conversation and a change of this magnitude demands more
thought than a casually written page and a half of legislative
text.
There was potential for there to be bipartisan agreement on
how to address current and future pandemics. And as we've
expressed previously, we would like nothing more than to find a
way to work with our colleagues in the Majority to address some
of these real issues. Sadly, the Majority's dedication to
circumventing the standing rules that have existed from the
first Congress leaves little room for deliberation and
discussion. Making fundamental changes to how the House
operates should be done in a thoughtful manner--not simply as a
reaction to an emergent need and an opportunity to consolidate
power and diminish the rights of the minority party.
Tom Cole.
Rob Woodall.
Michael C. Burgess, MD
Debbie Lesko.
[all]