Posted on 01/07/2005 6:31:41 AM PST by OXENinFLA
January 6, 2005 House -- Congressional Record
9 . LEGITIMATE ELECTION --
10 . ROBBING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE --
11 . AMERICAN BOXER REBELLION --
12 . BOXER REBELLION OF TODAY --
23 . COUNTING ELECTORAL VOTES--JOINT SESSION OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE HELD PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1 --
24 . MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE
5 . SCHEDULE
7 . TODAY'S AGENDA
11 . JOINT SESSION
19 . OBJECTION TO COUNTING OF OHIO ELECTORAL VOTES
Feel free to post your favorite parts!
The Democratic Judiciary Committee Staff Report clearly establishes that the State of Ohio has not met its obligation to conduct a fair election. Ohio's partisan Secretary of State, Mr. Kenneth Blackwell, I am ashamed to say an African American man has failed to follow even Ohio's election procedures, let alone procedures that comply with Federal law and constitutional requirements.Our ancestors who died for the right to vote certainly must be turning over in their graves.
Mr. HAYWORTH. And so, Mr. Speaker, it begins, the canard of hyperbole, the delusional statements, indeed, word coming to this body that later today, in a joint session, one from the other body will lead an American-born Boxer Rebellion.
The conspiracy theorists use celluloid and mockumentaries and fevered imaginings to try to mischaracterize debate and, as we understand, even this afternoon, try to dissuade numbers and facts.
Mr. Speaker, the sour grapes, the sensationalism, the conspiracy theories, and the fear and smear should be laid to rest. It will be later this afternoon, and for the American people it will be through vigorous factual debate.
Amazing.
(Mr. HAYWORTH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, this may be the most appropriate time to remind each and every one of us engaged in this debate that it is the hallmark of our constitutional Republic and our government to operate by the consent of the governed. And there is a corollary to that which we should likewise remember: in a free system where the people choose, it is also necessary for contestants who are unsuccessful to accept the verdict of the people. In our Republic there are majority rules, but the rights of the minority are protected.
Now, also understand what has transpired this afternoon. In what should be a reaffirmation of our constitutional Republic and the Electoral College, a Member has chosen to dispute the outcome of voting in the State of Ohio. Despite that fact, speaker after speaker on the minority side, including the leader from California, has said they accept the verdict of the election. Do not misunderstand, I say to my colleagues. This is a vitally important point.
The problem we confront with this debate is that it serves to plant the insidious seeds of doubt in the electoral process. All the talk of election reform, all the talk of hearings that the leader championed, all the process complaints, some that are inaccurate that have come from the other side, are points to be debated in the regular business of this House. Yes, they are important. But to disrupt the Electoral College, to say in effect, hey, we just want to shine light on this problem, is not the proper use of the people's time. And with all due respect, I question not the intent; but the net effect is this: again, it is to place doubt and to institutionalize forever the notion of grumbling and a lack of acceptance of the verdict of the people. In less elevated terms, Mr. Speaker, it is called sour grapes; and it is sad to see in this House.
Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not point out that this view is not
[Page: H110] GPO's PDF
Or Kerry spokesman Joe Lockhart on Election Day: ``We think the system has worked today. There were thousands of lawyers deployed to make sure that no one tried to take advantage or unfair advantage and, by and large, it has worked. I've seen very few reports of irregularities, and even the ones we have seen, after a little investigation, you find there is not much going on.''
And it bears repeating, even though he has spoken earlier today in Baghdad and made some comments I vociferously disagree with from a Member of the Senate going into a wartime theater, listen to the words of the nominee of your own party who lost the election, my friends on the Democratic side: ``But the outcome should be decided by voters, not a protracted legal process. I would not give up this fight if there was a chance we should prevail, but it is now clear that even when all of the provisional ballots are counted, which they will be, there won't be enough outstanding votes for us to be able to win Ohio and, therefore, we cannot win this election.''
Mr. Speaker, one of the virtues of our system is this: in America, there are never lost causes because, in America, there are never fully gained causes. That is why we have the electoral process. How sad the electoral process has been sidelined today for a publicity stunt.
Blackwell should write her and tell her he's ashamed she's an American.
How interesting, however, that their challenge as it talks about conspiracies in the State of Ohio, making allegations that have no basis of fact, their challenge is silent about an incident in Ohio where fraudulent voter registration forms were being submitted and the worker who collected them was paid in crack cocaine.
How interesting that their challenge does not mention the Democratic group ACORN which submitted vote registrations for dead people that used 25 different addresses for the same individual....
Mr. Speaker, the challenges to those votes in Ohio are turkeys. I think those turkeys should be given to someone else.
To call this circus a 'rebellion' gives it more dignity than it deserves.
Take THAT DU!
Just imagine the rage from the left if a white congressman/woman had said that same thing.
I think that this debate diminishes this House. This was one of the proudest weeks of my life, when my father was able to see his son being sworn into this House, when I was able to bring my daughter to watch her father being sworn into this House.
As a son of immigrants, I take very seriously the freedoms and rights granted to us in this country, America, the greatest country in the world.
I think we diminish this House by the discussion that we are having. Let us be clear. We are not here at a congressional hearing. We are not hear to talk about improving our election procedures. We are hear to certify the results of this recent election. We are here to certify the fact that President Bush did, indeed, win the votes granted to him in the State of Ohio; did, indeed, win election across this great country.
In many ways, I am glad that my daughter and father are no longer here to watch this debate taking place in this House. Even CBS news has recognized the fact that President Bush has won this election. This is probably the only place left that is still disputing this election.
Take that, Conyers!
The lady has cajones.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).
(Mr. PRICE of Georgia asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise in opposition to the objection.
Mr. Speaker, as a freshman member I stood here with the rest of you two days ago taking an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I couldn't be more proud and humbled to be a Member of the finest deliberative body in the Nation.
Having served four terms in my state Senate in Georgia in both the majority and minority--I have great respect for appropriate procedural objections.
However, political grandstanding during this vital electoral college ballot count is shameful and reprehensible.
What my new colleagues on the other side of the aisle are doing today is destructive of our system. To raise an objection for which many speakers on the other side have said they will oppose--only feeds unfounded discontent in the veracity of our great democracy.
I shall never lose my faith and pride in our great Nation and will fight vigorously and pray for our future at a time when some in the minority party put politics over people.
God Bless America.
Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, we have been asked by our Democratic colleagues to take this objection to the vote today seriously. We have been told this is not frivolous.
Well, we have to ask, why Ohio? Why Ohio, the State that happened to put President Bush over the top? Why not Minnesota where Kerry won, where there were discrepancies and Democrat groups working inside polling places at polling booths? Why not New Hampshire where Kerry won where Democrat operatives allegedly slashed wheels of vehicles intended to take Republicans to the polls? Why not Wisconsin which Kerry won where Democrat operatives physically intimidated Republican voters? Or why not even Colorado where a Democrat worker with ACORN signed herself up to vote 25 different times? Or why not New Mexico where a 13-year old was registered to vote by the same Democrat front group? And why not some of the other problems that were going on in Ohio, why do we not talk about them?
For example, in Franklin County in Ohio where a dead person was registered to vote, or 25 addresses were submitted for the same man, why are they not concerned about that? Or why not raise a question about Lake County where a man who had been dead for 20 years was registered to vote?
Our Democrat colleagues do not seem to be concerned about that, and yet here is the serious charge of that complaint by Reverend Bill Moss: A, that there was a computer in the White House hooked up to voting booths in Ohio which was allegedly controlled by some super agent who could change the results of those elections in Ohio from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I do not think even Hollywood would even buy into that;
B, there were numerous agents who were doing ``unidentified things'' to intimidate voters;
C, that a Democrat Supreme Court candidate received more votes than John Kerry; therefore, the election is a fraud; and
D, because the exit polls showed Kerry was going to win, he should have won. The only thing that I know that are less realistic than exit polls are Godzilla movies, and yet that is what the basis of this attack was.
We have heard that many voters had to stand in line for 3 hours. My dad is 87 years old. He is blind. He is very inconvenienced when he votes. He has to have assistance, yet as a World War II veteran and survivor, he is proud to wait 3 hours to vote. He only wishes more of his peer group was alive to have the same honor.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller).
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues across the aisle have two sides to choose from, the John Kerry side that acknowledges the election is over and President Bush has won, or the Michael Moore side that defines democracy as Democrats going to the polls, and conspiracy as Republicans going to the polls. The election is over and the results could not be clearer. Why are we here wasting time on silly, Hollywood-inspired conspiracy theories? Well, since Hollywood likes conspiracy so much, here are some real facts.
On June 23, 2004, the Michael Moore movie Fahrenheit 9/11 premiered in Washington, D.C. According to U.S. News and World Report, the New York Times and the National Journal, one of the few Senators who attended its premier was Senator Barbara Boxer. In his movie, Mr. Moore said it was shameful that not one U.S. Senator objected to the electoral vote in Florida.
Two days ago on January 4, 2005, the same Michael Moore published a new letter to Senator Boxer reminding them that they did not object to the electoral vote count 4 years ago, and he requested they rise and object to the vote count from Ohio today. Today, in fact, Senator Boxer objected to the vote count. Does Michael Moore and the people in the Michael Moore wing of the Democrat Party really think the American people and their elected representatives are so stupid that we could be tricked into objecting to these electoral results. Well, the answer, I think, is yes.
Michael Moore told a British newspaper, ``Americans are possibly the dumbest people on the planet. Our stupidity is embarrassing.'' In Germany, Mr. Moore told the German people, ``You can see us Americans coming down the street. We have that big grin on our face all the time because our brains are not loaded down.''
Regarding those who are now killing Americans in Iraq, Michael Moore said, ``The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not insurgents or terrorists or the enemy, they are the
[Page: H118] GPO's PDF
Mr. Speaker, how many normal people in this country really believe that a terrorist like al-Zarqawi is the same as Paul Revere? I ask my colleagues to vote no on this objection.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to request permission to address the House.
The SPEAKER. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I dedicate my objection to Ohio's electoral votes to Mr. Mike Moore, the producer of the documentary Fahrenheit 9/11, and I thank him for educating the world on the threats to our democracy and the proceedings of this House on the acceptance of the Electoral College votes for the 2000 Presidential election.
The Democratic Judiciary Committee Staff Report clearly establishes that the State of Ohio has not met its obligation to conduct a fair election. Ohio's partisan Secretary of State, Mr. Kenneth Blackwell, I am ashamed to say an African American man has failed to follow even Ohio's election procedures, let alone procedures that comply with Federal law and constitutional requirements. Our ancestors who died for the right to vote certainly must be turning over in their graves.
Mr. Speaker, I traveled to Ohio where the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) convened hearings, and I listened to citizen after citizen describe the Ohio election debacle. When there is a shortage of voting machines that leads to lines of up to 10 hours to cast a vote in precincts that are predominant minority and Democratic voters, forcing countless prospective voters to leave without voting, and where a number of Democratic precincts had fewer machines than were used in the primary election, despite the certainty of a much higher turnout in the hotly contested general election for President, it is clear that Ohio has failed to run a fair election.
When Mr. Blackwell arbitrarily and unreasonably refused to provide provisional ballots to voters who were in the right county but the wrong precinct, or to voters who requested but did not receive an absentee ballot in a timely manner, it is clear that Ohio has failed to run a fair election. When a county in Ohio shows more votes cast than registered voters, or when another Ohio county shows an underfunded Democratic State Supreme Court candidate getting substantially more votes than the well-funded campaign of Senator Kerry, it is clear that Ohio has failed to run a fair election.
When Secretary of State Blackwell refused to recognize thousands of new voter applications because they are not on postcard-weight paper, it is clear that Ohio has failed to run a fair election. And where Secretary Blackwell, in violation of his statutory duty to investigate election irregularities, refused to investigate or remedy any of the hundreds of cases of voter intimidations reported to him, it is more than clear that Ohio has failed to run a fair election.
Mr. Speaker, we are now over 4 years beyond the nightmare of Florida in the 2000 election. I chaired the Democratic Caucus Election Reform Committee. We traveled all over this country. We held hearings. I worked with Members of this House to pass HAVA, Help America Vote Act. Yet, is there anyone who can say we have a fair election system or this is the best we can do?
The 2004 election in Ohio and elsewhere revealed that enormous problems remain in our election systems and HAVA simply does not address those problems. It is stunning to me that in the 21st century we continue to use horse-and-buggy procedures to conduct our elections. It is amazing but true that in many jurisdictions we use more sophisticated technology to run the daily lottery than we devote to our election system. Incredibly even in those few jurisdictions that have moved to electronic voting to avoid the problem of chads and punch cards, we do not require a verifiable paper trail to protect against vote tampering. If an ATM machine can give each user a receipt that that user can reply upon, then a voting machine should also be able to give a receipt.
Mr. Speaker, the issue before us is not whether the problems in the Ohio election were outcome determinative, although they could have been, it is whether the State has met its obligation to provide every voter with an equal opportunity to vote and have his vote counted. We must not allow these egregious violations to be trivialized. There is no constitutionally acceptable level of inequality in access to voting in Federal elections.
Mr. Speaker, there is no conceivable justification for disqualifying a vote for President or Senator on the count that a legally qualified voter shows up to cast his vote in the right State but the wrong precinct. Why could we not count that voter's ballot? The voter's intent is clear. There is no question as to the voter's right to vote for the President of the United States or Senator. We can ensure that the voter does not cast a provisional ballot in more than one location.
Rep. Maxine Waters - "Mr. Kenneth Blackwell, Ohio Secretary of State, who I am ashamed to say is an African-American man..."
She definitely should have been aborted.
Good 'ol Maxine. She's the one with the need to be embarrassed.
Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, this is obviously a difficult debate for many reasons. I commend the Senator from California for joining with members of the House, most particularly Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones, in raising the objection, because it does permit us to air some of these issues--something I believe is necessary for the smooth functioning of our democracy and the integrity of the most precious right of any citizen, namely, the right to vote.
As we look at our election system, I think it is fair to say there are many legitimate questions about its accuracy and about its integrity, and they are not confined to the State of Ohio. They are ones that have arisen throughout our country and certainly because of the election of 2000 have been given high relief in the last 4 years. Then questions were raised additionally with respect to this election which deepened the concern of many people about whether we can assure the continuity of our democratic process by ensuring the consent of the governed and the acceptance of the results of elections.
Several weeks ago, we stood in great admiration as a nation behind the people of Ukraine as they took to the streets to demand they be given the right to an election where every vote was counted.
In a few weeks, we are going to see an election in Iraq. We know there are people literally dying in Iraq for the right to cast a free vote. I am very proud of our country, that we have stood with Ukrainians, Iraqis, and others around the world, but increasingly, I worry that if this body, this Congress does not stand up on a bipartisan basis for the right to vote here at home, our moral authority will be weakened.
I take that very seriously because freedom is our most precious value, and we have for 225-plus years worked to form a more perfect Union. At first, not everybody was permitted to vote in our own country, but through constitutional changes, a civil war, and a civil rights movement, we expanded the franchise. This year we will celebrate the anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, and it will be an opportunity for us to take a look at this landmark legislation and determine how we are going to move it into the 21st century so it really stands for what it was intended to do when it was first passed.
I would be standing here saying this no matter what the outcome of the election because I still think the best rule in politics is the golden rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I worry, whether it is a Democratic or Republican administration or a local county, State, or Federal election, that we are on a slippery slope as a nation.
My colleague, Senator Boxer, and I, along with former Senator Bob Graham of Florida, introduced legislation last year to try to assure a verifiable paper audit. We did not get anywhere with that. We did not get a hearing before the Rules Committee, and I hope the distinguished chair of the Rules Committee will hold such a hearing this year because if we can buy a lottery ticket or go to a bank and make an ATM deposit, then we know we can use an electronic transfer mechanism that gives us a record. That is just one of the many issues we can deal with technologically.
Last spring, India, the largest democracy--we are the oldest democracy, so in that way we are real partners in this great enterprise of democracy--had an election. Mr. President, 550 million or
[Page: S52] GPO's PDF
Surely, we should be setting the standards. I hope in this body, and thanks to the objection of my friend from California, this debate which started today will continue.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I did not anticipate speaking today, but the importance of this issue is enough for me to address this body.
During the election, I had the occasion of meeting a woman who had supported me in my campaign. She decided to come to shake my hand and take a photograph. She is a wonderful woman. She was not asking for anything. I was very grateful that she took time to come by. It was an unexceptional moment except for the fact that she was born in 1894. Her name is Marguerite Lewis, an African-American woman who had been born in Louisiana, born in the shadow of slavery, born at a time when lynchings were commonplace, born at a time when African Americans and women could not vote. Yet, over the course of decades she had participated in broadening our democracy and ensuring that, in fact, at some point, if not herself, then her children, her grandchildren, and her great-grandchildren would be in a position in which they could, too, call themselves citizens of the United States and make certain that this Government works not just on behalf of the mighty and the powerful but also on behalf of people like her.
So the fact that she voted and her vote was counted in this election was of supreme importance to her and it is the memory of talking to her and shaking her hand that causes me to rise on this occasion.
I am absolutely convinced that the President of the United States, George Bush, won this election. I also believe he got more votes in Ohio. As has already been said by some of the speakers in this body, this is not an issue in which we are challenging the outcome of the election. It is important for us to separate the issue of the election outcome with the election process.
I was not in this body 4 years ago, but what I observed as a voter and as a citizen of Illinois 4 years ago was troubling evidence of the fact that not every vote was being counted. It is unfortunate that 4 years later we continue to see circumstances in which people who believe they have the right to vote, who show up at the polls, still continue to confront the sort of problems that have been documented as taking place not just in Ohio but places all across the country.
I strongly urge that this Chamber, as well as the House of Representatives, take it upon itself once and for all to reform this system.
There is no reason, at a time when we have enormous battles taking place ideologically all across the globe, at a time when we try to make certain we encourage democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan and other places throughout the world, that we have the legitimacy of our elections challenged--rightly or wrongly--by people who are not certain as to whether our processes are fair and just.
This is something we can fix. We have experts on both sides of the aisle who know how to fix it. What we have lacked is the political will.
I strongly urge that, in a circumstance in which too many voters have stood in long lines for hours, in which too many voters have cast votes on machines that jam or malfunction or suck the votes without a trace, in which too many voters try to register to vote only to discover that their names don't appear on the roles or that partisan political interests and those that serve them have worked hard to throw up every barrier to recognize them as lawful, in which too many voters will know that there are different elections for different parts of the country and that these differences turn shamefully on differences of wealth or of race, in which too many voters have to contend with State officials, servants of the public, who put partisan or personal political interests ahead of the public in administering our elections--in such circumstances, we have an obligation to fix the problem.
I have to add this is not a problem unique to this election, and it is not a partisan problem. Keep in mind, I come from Cook County, from Chicago, in which there is a long record of these kinds of problems taking place and disadvantaging Republicans as well as Democrats. So I ask that all of us rise up and use this occasion to amend this problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.