[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




 .                                                            
                         MARKUP OF H.R. 4563,
                  AMERICAN CONFIDENCE IN ELECTIONS ACT

=======================================================================

                                 MARKUP

                               before the

                           COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
                             ADMINISTRATION

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               ----------                              

                             JULY 13, 2023

                               ----------                              

      Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration
      
      [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

      
      
      
      


                             www.govinfo.gov
                           www.cha.house.gov
                           
                           
                           
                           
                           
                           
                           
                           
                           
                          MARKUP OF H.R. 4563,                           
                      AMERICAN CONFIDENCE IN ELECTIONS ACT
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      




                                 

 
                          MARKUP OF H.R. 4563,
                  AMERICAN CONFIDENCE IN ELECTIONS ACT

=======================================================================

                                 MARKUP

                               before the

                           COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
                             ADMINISTRATION

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             JULY 13, 2023

                               __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration


                             www.govinfo.gov
                           www.cha.house.gov
                           
                           
                            ______

             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 56-507              WASHINGTON : 2024
                
                           
                           
                           
                           
                           
                           
                   COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

                    BRYAN STEIL, Wisconsin, Chairman

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia            JOSEPH MORELLE, New York,
H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia              Ranking Member
GREG MURPHY, North Carolina          TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama
STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma             NORMA TORRES, California
MIKE CAREY, Ohio                     DEREK KILMER, Washington
ANTHONY D'ESPOSITO, New York
LAUREL LEE, Florida

                     Tim Monahan,  Staff Director 
                 Jamie Fleet,  Minority Staff Director 
                 
                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                           Opening Statements

Chairman Bryan Steil, Representative from the State of Wisconsin.     1
Ranking Member Joseph Morelle, Representative from the State of 
  New York.......................................................     2

                       Submissions for the Record

H.R. 4563........................................................     5
Chairman Steil's Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 
  4563...........................................................   230
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   451
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to H.R. 4536..................   461
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   466
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   470
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   482
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   494
Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   499
Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   529
Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   533
Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   537
Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   543
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   549
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   553
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   558
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   570
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   577
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to HR. 4563.........................................   588
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   593
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   600
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   605
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   609
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   613
Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   617
Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   622
Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   628
Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   633
Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   639
Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   643
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   647
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to HR. 4563.........................................   665
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to HR. 4563.........................................   669
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   672
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   678
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   682
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   686
Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to HR. 4563.........................................   689
Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   696
Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   702
Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   708
Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   713
Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   717
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   720
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   726
Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
  Substitute to H.R. 4563........................................   737
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   745
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   750
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   755
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   762
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   767
Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature 
  of a Substitute to H.R. 4563...................................   770


                          MARKUP OF H.R. 4563,



                  AMERICAN CONFIDENCE IN ELECTIONS ACT

                              ----------                              


                             July 13, 2023

                 Committee on House Administration,
                                  House of Representatives,
                                                   Washington, D.C.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:10 p.m., in 
room 1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Bryan Steil 
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Steil, Loudermilk, Griffith, 
Murphy, Bice, Carey, D'Esposito, Lee, Morelle, Sewell, Torres, 
and Kilmer.
    Staff present: Tim Monahan, Staff Director; Caleb Hays, 
Deputy Staff Director, General Counsel, Parliamentarian; 
Hillary Lassiter, Clerk; Alex Deise, Elections Counsel, 
Assistant Parliamentarian; Jordan Wilson, Director of Member 
Services; Thomas Lane, Elections Counsel and Director of 
Elections Coalitions; William Johnson, Deputy Clerk; Khalil 
Abboud, Minority Deputy Staff Director, Chief Counsel; Jamie 
Fleet, Minority Staff Director; Andrew Garcia, Minority Special 
Assistant; Sarah Nasta, Minority Elections Counsel; and Sean 
Wright, Minority Senior Elections Counsel.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BRYAN STEIL, CHAIRMAN OF THE 
 COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM 
                           WISCONSIN

    Chairman Steil. The Committee on House Administration will 
come to order. I note that a quorum is present.
    Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a 
recess at any time.
    The Committee meets today to consider H.R. 4563, the 
American Confidence in Elections Act. As required by House 
rules, a copy of the measure has been made available to Members 
and the public at least 24 hours in advance. The American 
Confidence in Elections Act, or the ACE Act, is the most 
conservative election integrity bill to be seriously considered 
in the House in a generation.
    Unlike Democrats' election bill last Congress, our ACE Act 
has gone through regular order and has been drafted in the 
open. The substantive text has been publicly available for 
months prior to this markup. We have held nine hearings, two 
public roundtables on this topic in Congress, with 42 
witnesses.
    I am proud of the work that we have done leading up to the 
introduction of the ACE Act. We have worked with State and 
local officials to ensure they have the tools they need to 
conduct free, fair, and secure elections. We have worked with 
Members across the House Republican Conference to incorporate 
nearly 50 standalone election integrity bills.
    Most importantly, we have listened to the American people, 
Republicans and Democrats, to address the concerns about faith 
in our elections. This week, we held a field hearing in 
Atlanta, Georgia, a State that has implemented common-sense 
election integrity reforms.
    Two years ago, Georgia implemented their election integrity 
reform with S.B. 202. The left was relentless in attacking the 
bill. Those narratives were ultimately proved false. The data 
shows voter participation increased under the new law. Georgia 
experienced record midterm turnout in 2022.
    The left is still falsely claiming election integrity leads 
to voter suppression. They are now attacking the ACE Act. The 
ACE Act equips States with tools to implement common-sense 
election integrity reforms. It strengthens elections in D.C., 
and it protects Americans' First Amendment rights.
    Some of the most important provisions include making it 
easier for States to conform citizenship on photo voter ID, 
giving States access to tools to maintain accurate voter lists, 
preventing Federal funds from going to States that allow 
citizens--noncitizens to vote, closing loopholes foreign actors 
are exploiting to influence U.S. elections, and prohibiting 
Federal agencies from engaging in political activities and 
targeting Americans based on their political beliefs.
    Over the past 20 years, voters on both sides of the aisle 
have lost faith in our elections. When American voters are more 
confident, they are more likely to participate. We are prepared 
to fight against false narratives and secure our elections.
    I will now recognize Ranking Member Morelle for 5 minutes 
for the purpose of offering an opening statement.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH MORELLE, RANKING MEMBER OF THE 
 COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM 
                            NEW YORK

    Mr. Morelle. Good afternoon. Thank you to Chairman Steil 
for welcoming us today, and thanks for your indulgence as I 
rushed over from an Appropriations markup.
    I am hopeful that this meeting today will be the 
Committee's final time catering to the demands of election 
deniers. I am hopeful that, once we are through with this anti-
voter exercise my majority colleagues will feel liberated 
finally to put unfounded bogus claims of voter fraud and a lack 
of election integrity behind them.
    This bill, what the majority is calling the American 
Confidence in Elections Act, is really nothing of the sort. It 
will do nothing to increase voter access to the ballot, which 
in my view ought to be our primary goal and objective, nor will 
it make Americans feel any more confident that Congress is 
addressing the real threat to the health of our Republic: 
former President Trump and his supporters, who have spent years 
now undermining the strength of our democratic institutions. 
The bill is unfair, undemocratic, and un-American. As The 
Washington Post has said, this bill will open up the spigots of 
dark money nationwide and make voting more difficult.
    Like many State-based anti-voter bills, which we have seen 
in recent years, which are nakedly partisan power grabs 
masquerading as election integrity, to borrow another phrase 
from The Washington Post, ACE Act provisions appear to have 
been concocted in a voter-suppression laboratory with election 
deniers like two-time Committee witness Hans von Spakovsky and 
Cleta Mitchell, from President Trump's lawyer, who have been 
drafting suppressive voting laws around the country, performing 
the roles of mad scientists determined to unleash this anti-
democracy monster on the American public.
    Today, House Democrats will see what we can do to make this 
legislation more palatable to our democratic institutions and 
to the American public. I plan on offering, along with my 
colleagues, dozens of amendments. I hope each can be 
meaningfully considered by this Committee.
    At the end of the day, the anti-voter, pro-dark money ACE 
Act is fatally flawed. While Americans can take solace from the 
fact that this bill will never become law, I again urge my 
colleagues to work in partnership with our side of the aisle to 
achieve the dream of full electoral participation for all 
Americans.
    I want to note, Mr. Chairman, we have enjoyed working with 
your terrific staff, and I mean that sincerely. The process for 
this markup, however, has caused some confusion. The notice 
provided for electronic pre-filing of amendments and for any 
amendment filed after the deadline a requirement to deliver 25 
copies of the amendment to 1309 Longworth House Office 
Building. In conflict with the notice, we were advised to 
deliver 25 copies of pre-filed amendments.
    Before I yield back, I would just like to raise a 
parliamentary inquiry. What is the basis of Committee House 
rules to require the hard copy delivery of pre-filed 
amendments?
    With that, I will yield back and wait for your answer.
    Chairman Steil. Under rule 20 of the Committee's rules, it 
allows the Chairman to set the regulations as needed for the 
amendments. Any further parliamentary inquiry?
    Mr. Morelle. Well, I just want to note that that is 
contrary to the notice that went out, which indicated that we 
would not have to have--and frankly, you know, in an 
environment where we are worried about paper supplies and 
trying to make sure we are conserving both dollars and trees, 
it seems to me that was unwarranted.
    Chairman Steil. Your comments are taken into consideration, 
and apologize for the difficulty it may have posed.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Chairman Steil. Without objection--you yield back?
    Mr. Morelle. I do, sir.
    Chairman Steil. Very good.
    Without objection, the opening statements of all other 
Members will be included in the record if they are provided to 
the clerk of the Committee by noon tomorrow.
    The clerk will please report the bill.
    The Clerk. H.R. 4563, a bill to promote election integrity, 
voter confidence, and faith in elections by removing----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the first reading of the 
bill is dispensed with.
    Also, without objection, the bill will be considered as 
read and open to amendment at any point.
    [House bill H.R. 4563 follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    
    Chairman Steil. I have an Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute at the desk.
    The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 
4563, offered by Mr. Steil of Wisconsin, strike all----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute is considered as read and will be 
considered as original text for the purpose of further 
amendment.
    [Chairman Steil's Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute 
to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 




[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Chairman Steil. This amendment makes technical and 
conforming changes and tweaks. Do any Members wish to be 
recognized?
    Mr. Morelle. May I just ask for clarification? This is 
simply on adopting the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute? 
We will be able----
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee report 
H.R. 4563 favorably to the House, as amended.
    Mr. Morelle. No, no, no. I am sorry. I have an amendment at 
the desk.
    Ms. Lee. All right.
    Chairman Steil. Well----
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle. I thought this was an Amendment in the Nature 
of a Substitute. I am sorry.
    Chairman Steil. We will allow.
    Mr. Morelle. I understand. My apology--I will----
    Chairman Steil. I am trying to be functional here.
    Mr. Morelle. Yep. Yep. Gotcha.
    Chairman Steil. Do you yield back?
    Ms. Lee. Yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. All right.
    Mr. Morelle. Yes. Mr. Chairman, I do have a----
    Chairman Steil. For what purpose does the gentleman from 
New York seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will please distribute the 
amendment.
    The clerk will please report the amendment. The clerk will 
report the amendment.
    The Clerk. An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mr. Morelle of New York.
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for the 
opportunity to advance this amendment.
    The amendment is the Freedom to Vote Act. We believe, as I 
indicated in my opening statement, and as I have said through 
repeated meetings of this Committee, that our freedoms are 
under attack. The freedom to make your own healthcare 
decisions, most critically the freedom to those who choose--to 
choose; freedom from fear, where our schoolchildren have 
routine active shooter drills, and extremists in Congress 
simply say, ``Oh, well, we will pass along our prayers and good 
wishes''; even the freedom to read what you want with the bans 
on books increasing at a rapid pace paralleling the mid-20th 
century.
    This amendment is about protecting the most fundamental of 
those freedoms, the freedom to vote. This year, State 
legislatures have passed a near record number of new 
restrictive voting laws. The Supreme Court found multiple 
congressional maps racially gerrymandered, and violent threats 
against election workers and officials remain a constant peril. 
This amendment will protect the most basic and fundamental 
freedoms.
    For example, the amendment will expand automatic voter 
registration and same-day registration now allowed in 22 States 
and in Washington, D.C.; set a national standard for no-excuse 
vote by mail for every eligible voter; protect the integrity of 
our voter registration list by prohibiting unlawful and faulty 
voter purges; expand early voting by requiring States to offer 
early voting at least 2 weeks prior to election day; protected 
access to the ballot for individuals with different physical 
abilities; makes election day a national holiday; and prevent 
enemies, foreign and domestic, from subverting the will of 
voters by restricting the politicized removal of election 
officials in cracking down on foreign influence in our 
politics. The freedom to vote is freedom for everyone.
    As a son of a community that holds as hallowed two famous 
Rochesterians, two famous Americans, Frederick Douglass and 
Susan B. Anthony, who dedicated their lives to expanding the 
franchise, expanding the right for all Americans to vote, I 
feel incredibly strongly about the freedom to vote and the 
expansion of voting, which is the most basic freedom that we 
hold. This amendment guarantees just that, and I urge its 
adoption.
    With that, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Sewell. Mr.----
    Chairman Steil. For what purposes does the gentlewoman seek 
recognition?
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman is recognized.
    Ms. Sewell. Today we are taking up a bill, the ACE Act, 
that would suppress vote versus allowing people to vote more 
freely. I want to encourage my colleagues to support the 
amendment at the table, the Freedom to Vote Act. This amendment 
would address the States' efforts to silence and suppress 
voters by setting national standards for ballot access.
    Without a doubt, we are at a great inflection point in our 
Nation's history. Today's markup of the ACE Act makes that 
plainly clear. Instead of promoting access, the ACE Act makes 
voting more difficult. We know that voter suppression and 
discrimination are alive and well. Last month was the 10th 
anniversary of the Supreme Court's devastating decision in 
Shelby v. Holder, which undermined the essential pre-clearance 
provisions of the Voting Rights Act.
    Immediately after the decision, States across this Nation 
enacted laws to purge voter rolls, to close polling stations 
without notice, and to restrict voter access. Many of these 
laws targeted communities of color, the disabled, and youth. 
Likewise, as the Chairman knows well, we saw unprecedented 
voter turnout in the 2020 election. Rather than responding to 
increased voter participation with welcoming arms and pro-voter 
policies, States enacted laws that rolled back access and aimed 
to erect roadblocks to the ballot box.
    That trend continues this year. In the first half of 2023, 
11 States, including my own, enacted 13 State laws that 
restrict the--that restrict access to the ballot box. It is our 
duty and firmly within our constitutional powers as a Congress 
to protect the rights of voters and ensure equal access to the 
franchise. This amendment does just that.
    It sets nationwide standards for access to early voting, 
promotes voter registration through automatic voter 
registration, same-day voter registration, and online voter 
registration. It gives every voter access to no-excuse absentee 
balloting. It protects the security of our election 
infrastructure and election workers, among other provisions.
    Our esteemed late colleague John Lewis once said that ours 
is a struggle of a lifetime, the fight for voting rights. It is 
not just a fight for 1 day, 1 hour, 1 week; it is truly a fight 
of a lifetime. Today is our opportunity to do our part in this 
fight for voting rights. I support this amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    For what purpose does the gentlewoman from Florida seek 
recognition?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, move to strike the last word.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, the American Confidence in Elections 
Act is designed to provide States with the tools that they need 
to identify best practices as they relate to elections, 
implement those best practices at home, ensure that the 
elections they are conducting are secure, accurate, and 
efficient.
    However, we recognize that our Constitution gives primary 
responsibility for the administration of elections to the 
State. The American Confidence in Elections Act recognizes this 
principle, and it recognizes the role that Congress can and 
should have in being a resource, in providing States with these 
tools, regulating that which is appropriate, however also 
leaving to States what is their constitutionally identified 
role as to elections.
    Mr. Chairman, this amendment would Federalize, would bring 
to Congress a number of matters that are squarely left to 
States to determine and design. The Government closest to the 
people is best to serve its needs, and our States are the ones 
who should be deciding specific policies, specific procedures 
and practices that they will implement and utilize. This 
amendment does the opposite and brings to Congress to regulate 
the types of election administration practices that do not 
belong here.
    For that reason, Mr. Chairman, I speak in opposition to 
this amendment and would suggest that it is--it should not be 
voted upon favorably. With that, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    For what purpose does the gentleman from Florida seek 
recognition?
    Mr. Loudermilk. Strike the last word.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman is recognized.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    During the course of working on this piece of legislation 
that we have before us here, we had a total of nine hearings 
and two public roundtables. That is significant. That was a lot 
of work that went into this. It was a lot of hearings. There 
was a lot of discussion, 224 pages. However, my colleagues on 
the other side of the aisle quite often expressed that they are 
concerned that we were having too many hearings on this bill. 
However, they come in with 600-plus pages, let us see, 618 
pages that they are ready to pass now without any consideration 
whatsoever.
    Look, as I have said before in other hearings, transparency 
and accountability are important to the American people. We 
have been very transparent, and this sets up a set of 
accountabilities for elections across the Nation so that 
Americans can feel confident in their elections. Mr. Chairman, 
I oppose the massive amendment that is sitting on our desk, and 
I yield back my time.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. No, Mr. Chairman. It is withdrawn.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Mr. Morelle.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no. No.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I would like to request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is ordered, and the clerk 
will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Nay, sorry.
    The Clerk. Votes nay.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Morelle. I thought for a minute I had you.
    Chairman Steil. Look at that bipartisanship. I thought I 
would just test to see if everybody was awake. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are two ayes 
and six noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Do any other Members seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will please distribute the 
amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. An amendment to H.R. 4536, offered by Mr. 
Morelle from New York. Insert after section----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to H.R. 4536 follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This amendment is the Stopping Another Non-Truthful Office 
Seeker, or the SANTOS, Act. This Act amends the Federal 
Election Campaign Act of 1971, will require any candidate for 
the U.S. Congress to file additional information about their 
educational background, military service, and employment 
history.
    I do not think I need to remind anyone in this body that 
Representative Santos has acknowledged lying about his 
education and employment while running for the House of 
Representatives. Indeed, he confirmed The New York Times story 
reporting on his lying about his educational and work history.
    More than that, he misled voters about his entire biography 
and resume, including religion, family history, education, and 
professional experience, most notably lying about graduated 
from Baruch College, having Jewish grandparents, working at 
Citigroup, losing employees in the Pulse Nightclub shooting, 
and running an animal charity.
    Mr. Santos, however, is not alone in misleading voters. 
Former Republican U.S. Senate candidate from Georgia Herschel 
Walker's campaign falsely claimed he graduated from the 
University of Georgia and Representative Andy Ogles said that 
he was mistaken when he--quote/unquote, mistaken when he said 
he graduated with an international relations degree after a 
local news outlet raised questions over whether he had 
embellished his education.
    This is essential disclosure. This will allow the American 
public to make judgments based on what a candidate has to 
acknowledge about their background, and this will allow voters 
to be better informed when it comes to decision making on 
election day.
    With that, I yield back, sir.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    The gentlewoman from Florida?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, point of order. I would assert that 
the amendment is not germane. It adds a criminal penalty, which 
falls within the jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee.
    Chairman Steil. I agree. The amendment is not germane.
    Do any other Members seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Did you make a ruling? I am sorry.
    Chairman Steil. It is not germane.
    Mr. Morelle. I would make a motion to appeal the ruling of 
the chair.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman is recognized.
    Mr. Loudermilk. I move to lay the appeal on the table.
    Chairman Steil. The question is on the motion to table. The 
motion is not debatable.
    As many of us are in favor of the motion to table, signify 
by saying aye.
    Those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote, sir.
    Chairman Steil. The question is on the motion to table.
    The clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes aye.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes aye.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes no.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes no.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there is six ayes 
and two noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Do any other Members seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. For what purpose does the gentleman seek 
recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mr. Morelle from New York. 
Insert----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This is another in a series relative to Stopping Another 
Non-Truthful Office Seeker, or SANTOS Act, this one relating to 
requiring U.S. Congressional candidates to file additional 
information about their military service, if any.
    As I indicated, we are growing increasingly alarmed and 
concerned about information that candidates posit during a 
campaign. What we would seek to do is have them at least 
disclose significant and vital pieces of information, which 
will certainly be important, if not dispositive, to voters when 
they go to the polls to make sure that there is at least 
disclosure of claims that they are making under Federal law.
    With that, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Does any other Member seek recognition?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, point of order. The amendment is not 
germane. It adds a criminal penalty, which falls within the 
jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee.
    Chairman Steil. I agree. The amendment is not germane.
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I would ask to appeal the ruling 
of the chair.
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I move to lay the appeal on the 
table.
    Chairman Steil. The question is on the motion to table. The 
motion is not debatable.
    As many are as in favor of the motion to table, signify by 
saying aye.
    Those opposed, say no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
    Mr. Morelle. I would request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. The question is on the motion to table.
    The clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes aye.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes aye.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes no.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes no.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes no.
    Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are six ayes 
and three noes.
    Chairman Steil. The motion to table carries.
    Does any other Member seek recognition?
    Ms. Sewell. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the 
desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will report the amendment.
    Mr. Loudermilk.
    [Presiding.] The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Ms. Sewell of Alabama. Add 
that the appropriate plan----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. It is actually Ms. Sewell.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Oh, I am sorry, Ms. Sewell. Ms. Sewell is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Millions of Americans are given only a single day to vote: 
Tuesday. I should know because my home State of Alabama is one 
of them. Actually, there are only four States that do not have 
early voting. Having only 1 day to vote means that if you have 
errands to run, if you have a job that does not give you time 
off, it makes it really difficult to vote.
    This amendment is very common sense. It would require 
States to provide at least 14 days of early voting for a period 
of consecutive days, including weekends, beginning on the 15th 
day before the date of the election and even earlier at the 
option of States.
    It also provides flexibility for vote by mail and small 
jurisdiction. This, along with other measures, like absentee 
voting and same-day voter registration, will help ensure that 
every voter has a chance to vote when it is possible for them, 
either by mail, before election day at the polls, or on 
election day at the polls.
    The amendment tasks the EAC with developing standards for 
early voting compliance, in-person voting, early voting, and 
absentee voting have administrative benefits. They ease 
congestion on election day. They lead to shorter lines, improve 
poll worker performance, and improve voter satisfaction. They 
also allow for early corrections of registration errors and 
voting system glitches.
    States have proven that early voting works to meet voters' 
needs. Forty-six States, Mr. Chairman, and the District of 
Columbia have early voting, with the length--the average length 
of that early voting being 20 days. Early voting works for 
diverse populations of voters. That is why it is being under 
attack.
    Protecting early voting protects the franchise for 
everyone. That is precisely why it is dangerous to not have 
early voting. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment 
and to get into some good trouble with me to make sure that 
every State has early voting. I yield back the balance of my 
time.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman has yielded back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman?
    Mr. Loudermilk. Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on 
her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. I do not----
    Mr. Loudermilk. I am sorry, the gentlewoman is recognized.
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I wish to be recognized in debate.
    Mr. Loudermilk. You may be recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, sir, and would just point out that 
hereto, the overarching goal of the American Confidence in 
Elections Act is to provide States with the tools that they 
need to improve the integrity and process of their elections 
while not exceeding the appropriate limits on Federal action 
when it comes to elections in the States as governed by our 
Constitution. With that, Mr. Chairman, I would oppose the 
amendment.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Does the gentlewoman yield?
    Ms. Lee. I do. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on 
her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. I do. Mr. Chairman, I would assert here that the 
amendment is not germane in that it falls within the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Education and Workforce.
    Mr. Loudermilk. I agree.
    Ms. Sewell. Early voting is our Committee.
    Mr. Loudermilk. I agree that it is not germane.
    Mr. Morelle. I ask for clarification, Mr. Chair. On what 
grounds?
    Mr. Loudermilk. The part that amends the Higher Education 
Act is within the jurisdiction of the Higher Education 
Committee.
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida seek to be recognized?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Oh. I agree with the gentlewoman from 
Florida that it is not germane.
    Mr. Morelle. I would appeal--I am sorry.
    Ms. Sewell. I appeal that motion. I submit a motion to 
appeal that ruling.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman has appealed the ruling of 
the chair. I move to lay any----
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I move to lay the appeal on the 
table.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you.
    The question is on the motion to table.
    The motion is not debatable.
    As many are as in favor of the motion to table, say aye.
    Those opposed, say no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I would ask for a roll call vote.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The question is on the motion to table. The 
clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes aye.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes aye.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes no.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes no.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes no.
    Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Mr. Loudermilk. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are five ayes 
and three noes.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The motion is agreed to.
    Does any Member wish to seek recognition?
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The clerk will please distribute the 
amendment.
    The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Ms. Sewell of Alabama. 
Add----
    Mr. Loudermilk. Without objection, the further reading of 
the amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Ms. Sewell is now recognized for 5 minutes in support of 
the amendment.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, early voting is such a critical 
tool to give voters access to the polls, and especially working 
Americans the freedom to vote at a time of their choosing and 
ensure that no American has to choose between their job and 
their fundamental right to vote. Even if this Committee refuses 
to ensure Americans have a full 2 weeks to exercise their right 
to vote, we still must act to ensure that every voter has a 
choice and a chance to vote when it is possible for them.
    Indeed, while many States offer an early voting period, a 
substantial number of those States close early voting the 
Friday before elections or earlier, meaning that voters miss 
the opportunity to vote during the weekend just before the 
election. This amendment would require States to provide at 
least 10 days of early voting for a period of consecutive days, 
including weekends, beginning on the 11th day before the 
election or even earlier at the option of the States. Although 
10 days is only half the nationwide average of early voting 
periods among the States, it does capture crucial time in the 
lead up to the election, including 2 weekends.
    Like the previous bill--I mean previous amendment, this 
amendment also provides flexibility for vote by mail and small 
jurisdictions and tasks the EAC with developing standards for 
early voting compliance. This, along the other measures, like 
absentee voting and same-day voter registration, will help 
ensure that every voter has a chance to vote when it is 
possible for them either by mail, before election day at the 
polls or at the polls on election day.
    I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman from Alabama yields back?
    Ms. Sewell. I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman yields.
    Is there any further debate on the amendment?
    Hearing none, does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on 
her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I do. I want to proceed with the 
point of order. This amendment is not germane. Provisions of 
the amendment fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
Education and Workforce.
    Ms. Sewell. Will the gentlelady yield?
    Mr. Loudermilk. I agree that--I agree it is not germane.
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chair, may I--parliamentary inquiry? Can 
the chair describe rule 10 elections jurisdiction for me--for 
the Committee?
    Mr. Loudermilk. This amendment amends the Higher Education 
Act, which is not within our jurisdiction.
    Mr. Morelle. No, but can you describe what the 
jurisdiction----
    Mr. Loudermilk. Do any other Members wish to speak on the 
amendment?
    Mr. Morelle. Well, Mr. Chairman, I was asking for just 
clarification on what--describe the rule 10 elections 
jurisdiction.
    Mr. Loudermilk. This Committee has jurisdiction over 
Federal elections but not higher education. That is within that 
Committee.
    Does the gentleman have a further point of order?
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I appeal that ruling.
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I move to lay the appeal on the 
table.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The question is on the motion to table. The 
motion is not debatable.
    As many are as in favor of the motion to the table, say 
aye.
    Those opposed, say no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I request a recorded vote.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The question is on the motion to table. The 
clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes aye.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes aye.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes no.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes no.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes no.
    Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Mr. Loudermilk. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are five ayes 
and three noes.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The amendment is agreed to. The motion is 
agreed to.
    Do any Members wish to seek recognition?
    Ms. Sewell. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the 
desk.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The clerk will please distribute the 
amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Ms. Sewell of Alabama.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, we must recommit ourselves to the 
ideal that every American should have a voice in our democracy. 
Indeed, as a Congress, we must do everything in our power to 
increase voter participation.
    I represent Alabama's Seventh Congressional District, a 
district with a long and storied history in this Nation for the 
struggle for free and fair access to the ballot box. My 
district is also home to Maxwell Air Force base and countless 
Alabamians who have proudly served their country in uniform.
    No one can deny the practical challenges facing our 
servicemen and women and their families in exercising the 
franchise. Indeed, efforts to assist members of the armed 
services date back to 1864, when President Lincoln issued an 
order to allow members of the military to return home to cast a 
ballot if they could not vote absentee according to the laws of 
their respective States.
    According to the Federal Voting Assistance Program at the 
Department of Defense, only two-thirds of military members are 
registered to vote--were registered to vote in 2020, compared 
with 83 percent of civilian voters with similar demographics. 
My straightforward amendment helps further the Federal voting 
assistance program's strategic plan to provide all servicemen 
and women the information that they need about the voting 
process.
    While three-quarters of Active military members are 
eligible to vote absentee under UOCAVA, the remaining quarter 
of military members voting at home deserve information about 
the mechanics of how and when and where they can vote to the 
same extent as colleagues presently served by the Federal 
Voting Assistance Program. A source of accessible information 
is particularly important for our younger servicemen and--women 
returning home from deployment. This is a common-sense 
amendment.
    Mr. Chairman, all I am asking is that servicemen and--women 
be given the opportunity to have information about voting. 
This, to me, should be a no-brainer, since what we are talking 
about is making sure that our servicemembers are on equal par 
with civilians when it comes to getting the proper information 
about when, where, and how to go about voting.
    This simple, straightforward amendment will help provide 
the information servicemembers need to vote from home so that 
servicemembers are all similarly situated in the information 
available to them, and they have the same information according 
to this process. I yield back the balance of my time.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman from Alabama has yielded.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized.
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I would like to just highlight the 
provisions in the American Confidence in Elections Act that 
specifically relate to overseas and military voters to ensure 
that they know how to vote and that we understand how our 
current services and systems are serving the men and women who 
serve our country overseas.
    Specifically, the American Confidence in Elections Act will 
require the GAO to conduct an analysis of current military 
voting administration and report findings to Congress to help 
us understand how ballots currently are being transmitted, how 
military men and women are accessing and utilizing their 
voters, whether those resources are sufficient or whether we 
need to be making any adjustments or changes. We share a common 
goal that the men and women who serve our country and their 
families overseas should have access and secure voting 
available to them, and that is addressed in the current text of 
the ACE Act.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman yields.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Hearing none, does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on 
her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. I do not, Mr. Chairman. The point of order is 
withdrawn.
    Mr. Loudermilk. If not, the question is on the amendment by 
Ms. Sewell from Alabama.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, signify by saying, no.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Mr. Loudermilk. First I have got to declare that.
    Ms. Sewell. Sorry.
    Mr. Loudermilk. I may rule in your favor, but I doubt it.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to. Now----
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I would like to request a 
recorded vote.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Oh, sorry. The nays have it.
    A roll call vote is ordered. See, I joined right in. You 
had me so convinced.
    In the opinion of the chair, the nays have it. A roll call 
vote is ordered. The clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. Nay.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Steil?
    [No response.]
    Ms. Sewell. Can I ask how Sewell voted?
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell is not recorded.
    Ms. Sewell. Sewell votes aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Steil?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    Mr. Loudermilk. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and five noes.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any other Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Kilmer. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, 
Kilmer amendment 48.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The clerk will please distribute the 
amendment.
    The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mr. Kilmer of Washington. 
Add at the end----
    Mr. Loudermilk. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    The gentleman is now recognized for 5 minutes in support of 
his amendment.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Currently, when a little campaign runs ads, whether it be 
on TV or radio, there are disclosure requirements. There is a 
public file. There is a copy of the ad that is open to the 
public. There is transparency in the system. That is valuable 
because you get to know who is paying for the ad. As we think 
about how we avoid having foreign actors try to influence our 
election, when they have to put their name on it, it makes it a 
lot harder.
    Here is the problem: We have seen more and more political 
spending migrate into the online arena, and right now there are 
not disclosure requirements for internet-based advertisement. 
You know, foreign interference in our elections is a real 
concern, and we know that digital platforms are being used in 
this regard, and the anonymity of the internet makes that far 
more possible.
    We have got to do something about that, and that is why I 
introduced a bill called the Honest Ads Act. It is bipartisan 
legislation that I led with Representative Mike Gallagher. It 
is bicameral. It is a bill that is Senator Klobuchar and 
Lindsey Graham in the Senate. In a nutshell, it just seeks to 
fortify our system against foreign interference in our 
elections and to augment some of the transparency of online 
political ads.
    Simply put, foreign entities should not have the power to 
buy online ads that can sway American elections. This is a 
giant loophole that we ought to close, and that is frankly why 
it has been bipartisan.
    Let me just talk quickly about what this amendment does. 
This amendment would empower the Federal Election Commission to 
require disclosure for online ads just like we already do for 
traditional media outlets like TV and radio and satellite. The 
objective here is to peel back that layer of anonymity and 
expose who is funding these online ads and, importantly, just 
to block foreign actors from purchasing them.
    The amendment stipulates that platforms with at least 50 
million monthly views must maintain a public file, just like TV 
and radio stations are currently required to do, of all 
electioneering communications purchased by a person or group 
who spends more than $500 on an ad on their platform. The bill 
mandates online platforms to make all reasonable efforts to 
ensure that foreign individuals and entities are not purchasing 
political ads aimed at influencing the American electorate.
    Then, finally, it expands the definition of electioneering 
communication in the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 to 
include paid internet and digital advertisement. When that law 
was created, we did not do online political advertisement. That 
has obviously changed as technology has enabled our internet 
feeds to be something I would like to turn off most Octobers.
    Listen, in this digital era, where the lines between 
domestic and foreign are blurred, it is just critical that we 
have laws that evolve alongside our technology. The Honest Ads 
Act is a means through which we can actually do that, provide 
some transparency and accountability, and make sure that 
Americans can be confident that the political content that they 
see online is not a secret operation funded by foreign 
interests.
    As we work toward that goal, I think it is important to 
just recognize that this is not partisan. There is a reason 
this bill is bipartisan on the House side, bipartisan on the 
Senate side, because protecting democracy is a shared 
responsibility and one that we need to uphold together.
    I offer this amendment largely to make you aware of this. I 
think this is an important issue for our Committee to take up. 
Having said that, I will withdraw the amendment and hope to 
work with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to move 
this forward. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentleman has yielded back. The 
amendment is withdrawn.
    Do any other Members wish to seek recognition?
    Mr. Kilmer. I do. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Do any Members wish to seek recognition?
    Mr. Kilmer. Sorry, Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk. It is Kilmer amendment 20.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The clerk will please distribute the 
amendment.
    Chairman Steil.
    [Presiding.] The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman, Mr. Kilmer, is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
    As we know, the Election Assistance Commission, an 
independent, bipartisan commission which was established by the 
Help America Vote Act, was enacted to respond to the 
controversy of the 2000 election. The Commission has 
responsibilities that are really important to the maintenance 
of our small ``d'' democratic infrastructure. It administers 
and audits Help America Vote funds that are appropriated by 
Congress for election administration and election security.
    It develops guidance to meet Help America Vote Act 
requirements. It adopts voluntary voting system guidelines. 
Importantly, the Election Assistance Commission serves as a 
national clearinghouse of information on election 
administration and accrediting testing laboratories and 
certifying voting systems.
    This amendment is pretty simple, recognizing the important 
work that the Election Assistance Commission does for our small 
``d'' democratic system, this amendment would authorize the 
Commission without a funding or a staffing cap. Let us ensure 
that it has the capacity to accomplish what it needs to 
accomplish and ensure fair elections that have integrity, and 
that is why I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Does any Member wish to be recognized?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida reserve her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The point of order being removed, all those 
in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is ordered, and the clerk 
will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Yes. Sorry.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Yes.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and five noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Do any other Members seek recognition?
    Mr. Kilmer. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. 
It is the one really to increasing the rate of pay for the 
Federal Election Commission staff director and general counsel.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will please distribute the 
amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mr. Kilmer is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
    This amendment would add one of the highest priority, 
bipartisan legislative recommendations that were offered by the 
Federal Election Commission. The Federal Election Commission on 
a unanimous, bipartisan basis suggests that Congress revise 
section 306 of the Federal Employees' Compensation Act to de-
link the salaries of the staff director and the general counsel 
from level four and level five of the executive schedule.
    What is the problem we are trying to solve here? Under the 
status quo, both of these positions, because they are limited 
under the executive schedule, mean that they are supervising 
personnel that are paid more than they are. That is something 
that many of us in Congress are accustomed to, but it is a 
problem in the Federal Election Commission because it is 
meaning that they are struggling to recruit people to fulfill 
these positions.
    The appointment and retention of these key leaders has been 
identified as a management challenge and a performance 
challenge of the Federal Election Commission by the inspector 
general in the nine most recent agency financial reports 
covering 2014 through 2022 and in performance on accountability 
reports.
    Let us just really quickly talk what this is about. The 
Federal Election Commission is, do you want a cop on the beat? 
Do you want to make sure that the agency that is tasked with 
ensuring compliance with campaign finance law actually can do 
its job? That is it. That is the question here. Do you want 
them to be able to do their job? That is really tough if you 
cannot hire people who are competent, capable, and adequately 
compensated.
    You know, I think it is really important when we get 
reports back from the inspector general that say this is a 
problem that Congress actually do something with that. That is 
what this is about. Simple. This is common sense, bipartisan 
again. The Federal Election Commission cannot agree what day it 
is often, but they agreed on this. This was a unanimous, 
bipartisan recommendation by the FEC that Congress do this to 
just improve their function.
    Mr. Kilmer. I support adopting this bipartisan measure, 
support this amendment, and I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Does any other Member wish to be recognized?
    I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I appreciate the gentleman's amendment and the previous 
amendment as well. I did not speak on the previous amendment, 
increasing the funding for the EAC. I actually think we should 
increase the funding for the EAC. I think our legislation looks 
at that as well.
    This amendment, I think, is offered in good faith. I think 
there is a lot of work that we could do in this space. I do not 
think this is the time to make sure we get that right. I think 
we should do that as a standalone. I think it has true 
substantive opportunity to be revised in U.S. Code, as it 
relates to the FEC as well as your previous amendment on the 
EAC. I think both of these are well-thought-through. I would 
want to make some adjustments and would love to work with you 
offline.
    I am going to recommend a ``no'' vote, and I will be voting 
``no'' on your amendment, but I do think the substance and the 
effort with which you are trying to move the ball forward in 
both the previous amendment and this amendment are in the right 
spirit and would look forward to working with you going 
forward.
    I yield back.
    Does any other Member wish to be recognized?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order.
    Ms. Lee. I withdraw the point of order, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Mr. Kilmer.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote, please.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested, and the 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Yes.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes yes.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Yes.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes yes.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and five noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any other Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Kilmer. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk 
regarding an EAC study on mail voting.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will please distribute the 
amendment.
    The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed of.
    [Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mr. Kilmer is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    I will make a confession. A lot has surprised me when I 
arrived in Washington, D.C., having served 8 years in the 
Washington State legislature. A lot of this is a shock to my 
system here in Congress.
    One of the things that has shocked me is the degree to 
which the discussion around mail voting in Washington, D.C., is 
partisan, that it is more political, in part because I come 
from a State that has had all-mail voting since 2011 and it has 
been widely embraced, it has been bipartisan, and for good 
reason.
    According to the Brookings Institute, despite partisan 
fears, no party gains an electoral advantage when mail voting 
is made more accessible. Instead, it just gives Americans a 
greater opportunity to choose how to cast their ballots in a 
manner that works for them.
    As I mentioned, my State went to all-mail voting in 2011. 
It was the second State to do that, to switch to an all-vote-
by-mail system. Now all eligible voters are automatically sent 
their ballot that they can return to election officials by the 
U.S. Postal Service, prepaid mail, or at a ballot dropbox.
    We have seen benefits. Mail voting means fewer poll workers 
and sites to coordinate, more security with an auditable paper 
trail, improved access because every eligible registered voter 
receives a ballot, ample time for voters to research candidates 
and issues, and higher voter turnout.
    Indeed, the former Republican Secretary of State of 
Washington, Kim Wyman, put it this way in a piece in The Hill. 
She said, ``Voting by mail is voting, plain and simple. It is 
safe and secure . . . and it is needed now more than ever.''
    To ensure that States have safe and reliable voting systems 
that are accessible to all, we need just more information on 
how voters can access the ballot box and what services they 
need.
    That is what this amendment does. This amendment directs 
the Election Assistance Commission to study the 2020 and 2022 
elections and requires them to make recommendations to States 
to assist them in transitioning to vote-by-mail procedures and 
improving existing vote-by-mail procedures. That is it.
    This is about trying to make the system work better, trying 
to recognize that this can be a means through which we can have 
a more accountable system, a better paper trail, more access 
for eligible voters to receive a ballot and to vote.
    With that, I encourage my colleagues to support this 
amendment.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    What I would note is that the American Confidence in 
Elections Act does touch on mail voting and encourages the EAC 
to help States understand that process and to provide, again, a 
clearinghouse of information, of practices that currently 
exist, what is working, what is not, to give States tools and 
information.
    What it does not do and what is an important distinction 
is, it does not attempt to impose or transition States who are 
not already utilizing vote-by-mail or already of their own 
accord seeking to integrate voting by mail.
    It strikes the appropriate balance between being a resource 
and providing information and standards that States can choose 
to implement while not directing States or pushing States to 
adopt any particular method of election administration as it 
relates to voting by mail.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I appreciate the nature in which this amendment was 
introduced. I think what is important here is we allow States 
to make decisions as to how States should best run their 
elections.
    I would note that I think we have seen some Democratic 
proposals that would require States to adopt universal mail-in 
balloting--not your amendment, but we have seen those proposals 
out there.
    I think what is so important when we look at mail balloting 
in particular--it is important across the board, but mail 
balloting in particular--is the importance of clean voter 
rolls.
    If we go back and just look at Washington, D.C., at their 
example in 2020 when the D.C. Government mailed every 
registered voter a ballot, the undeliverable rate in 2020 was 
11 percent. In 2022, it was 17 percent. It is showing that D.C. 
does not have voter rolls that were up to date and accurate, 
which is uniquely problematic as it relates to mail-in voting. 
It is not good across the board; it is uniquely bad in mail-in 
voting.
    I will recommend against this amendment, but appreciate the 
gentleman for his interest in this space.
    Does any other Member wish to be recognized?
    Mr. Kilmer. Can I--am I allowed to say something in 
closing?
    Chairman Steil. Somebody can take 5 and yield it to you.
    Mr. Kilmer. OK. Yes, thanks.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman is recognized.
    Ms. Sewell. I just want to say that, you know, I find it to 
be incredulous that we get to tell the citizens of D.C. what 
they can and cannot do when they are larger than a lot of the 
States that get 2 Senators and get Representatives. I find that 
to be really offensive, frankly. What D.C. needs is statehood.
    I am going to now yield the balance of my time to Derek, 
but this whole debate about D.C. is a debate that we should not 
be having. They should have their own representation.
    Mr. Kilmer. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.
    I appreciate you acknowledging that the amendment does not 
ask for all 50 States to do vote-by-mail. I will tell you who 
did want all 50 States to go to vote-by-mail--the former 
Republican Secretary of State of the State of Washington, Sam 
Reed. He wrote in The New York Times, ``Let us get vote-at-home 
in place in all 50 States.''
    That is not what this amendment does. It simply says, let 
us see what works and does not work; let us make sure that if 
those States are transitioning to vote-by-mail or trying to 
improve their system, that we have a sense of best practices. 
That is it.
    Again, I thank the gentlelady for yielding and urge support 
of this amendment.
    Chairman Steil. Does the gentlewoman yield back?
    Ms. Sewell. I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The question is on the amendment from Mr. 
Kilmer.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    Those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested, and the 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    If not, the clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and five noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Kilmer. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk 
regarding the blue-ribbon advisory panel for the Federal 
Election Commission.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mr. Kilmer of Washington. 
Insert----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed of.
    [Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mr. Kilmer is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thank you. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
    This again is related to the Federal Election Commission 
and just trying to get the cop back onto the beat, to make sure 
that we have an entity that is able to enforce campaign finance 
law and consists of people who know something about campaign 
finance law.
    This does not sound like a novel concept, but right now the 
means through which Federal Election Commission Commissioners 
are appointed is largely handpicked by politicians. Here is 
what this amendment does. It would ensure a fair and impartial 
and bipartisan process for selecting Federal Election 
Commission nominees.
    Right now, there are not very many qualifications for what 
it means to be a Federal Election Commission Commissioner. That 
is concerning. This tries to flesh that out a bit. It 
establishes an advisory panel, a blue-ribbon commission, to 
provide recommendations of potential nominees.
    The advisory panel would be bipartisan. It would be 
required to include individuals representing each major 
political party and individuals who are independent of a 
political party. It would consist of retired Federal judges, 
former law enforcement officials, or individuals with 
experience in election law.
    Simply put, this is about trying to ensure that the people 
who serve on the Federal Election Commission, who are nominated 
to serve on the Federal Election Commission, know something 
about Federal election law.
    I do want to point out, section 356 of the ACE Act does 
address a recruitment and retention concern of the Federal 
Election Commission--for example, to find and retain qualified 
candidates for the FEC by increasing the Commissioners' pay 
level to be competitive for Government service. That is a good 
thing to do.
    We have to get to this--we need to have a functioning 
Federal Election Commission, and it should consist of people 
who actually know something about election law. That is what 
this amendment is about.
    I will mention that this is part of a bipartisan bill, the 
Restoring Integrity to American Elections Act, that I am the 
lead sponsor of and Congressman Fitzpatrick is a cosponsor of 
and has been bipartisan for 10 years.
    Again, I would just urge support of this bill and hope that 
we can--of this amendment and hope we can move it forward.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further discussion of the amendment?
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I would note that the Federal Election Commission is a 
bipartisan commission. The appointment process under the 
Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 involves the minority and 
majority leaders in Congress and the President.
    The FEC is an independent agency. Giving the President the 
authority to appoint Commissioners has the peril of modifying 
this or turning the FEC into a more partisan agency.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment by 
Mr. Kilmer.
    All those in favor, signifying by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote, please.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested, and the 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and five noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Ms. Sewell. I do. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R.----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    John Lewis said that the vote is precious; it is almost 
sacred. I could not agree with him more. When I think about the 
fundamental right to vote, it is from which all other rights 
derive. That is why this amendment would make election day a 
legal public holiday.
    Working Americans deserve to have ample opportunity to 
vote. Our seniors, the disabled, and college students deserve 
to have ample opportunity to vote. This amendment helps to 
ensure working people have the freedom to vote without taking 
time off from work by making election day a Federal public 
holiday.
    Many hardworking Americans struggle to find time to make it 
to the polls on election day between work, childcare, and other 
responsibilities. Indeed, something as simple as getting stuck 
in traffic on the way home from work could mean not being able 
to get to the polls in time.
    Giving people time off work, school, and travel to the 
polling stations is an important part of making the ballot box 
accessible to all Americans. Allowing students time off school 
for election day would also allow parents to teach their 
children about civic responsibility and American democracy by 
bringing their children to the polls when they go to vote.
    I agree with John Lewis; the vote is sacred. We should 
acknowledge that. We, as elected officials, should be in the 
business of trying to make it easier for people to vote, not 
harder for people to vote. I ask my colleagues to join me in 
supporting this amendment.
    I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I appreciate the intent, I think, of increasing voter 
participation. I support that portion of this. I do not know 
that this, in fact, fully achieves that.
    The cost to create a Federal holiday, which really just 
impacts Federal workers and allows Federal workers to have an 
extra day off--and the Federal employees already get 44 paid 
Federal--remove--strike the number. They get a substantial 
number of days off already in the Federal Government. Just the 
Federal workforce for a day off costs about $818 million.
    Then the question would become, do people utilize that time 
to take a vacation or do they utilize it to exercise their 
constitutional right to vote?
    While well-intentioned, I think, to encourage people to 
vote, I am concerned about not only the fiscal impact that this 
would have on our Federal Government, which is already wildly 
upside-down, but also whether or not it would actually achieve 
the objective for which I believe the gentlewoman sets for it.
    I will be voting against the amendment.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Seeing none, does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on 
her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Ms. Sewell.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those no, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested. The clerk 
will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No, ma'am.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are two ayes 
and six noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Do other Members seek recognition?
    Ms. Sewell. Oh, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. I am still being generous. That may fade 
later this evening.
    The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Ms. Sewell of Alabama. 
Insert after title 6 in the following: Title----. Sense of 
Congress with respect to----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Chairman Steil. Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman reserves a point of order.
    Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The 15th Amendment to the United States Constitution 
establishes, quote, ``The right of citizens of the United 
States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United 
States or any State on account of race, color, or previous 
condition of servitude.''
    The 15th Amendment also created an explicit grant of 
congressional power. Quote, ``The Congress shall have the power 
to enforce this article by appropriate legislation,'' end 
quote.
    Recently, the Republican vice chair in your home State of 
Wisconsin, Mr. Chairman, publicly praised Republican efforts in 
the State to drive down turnout by voters of color in the 2022 
election.
    In a post-election email to the Republican supporters in 
Milwaukee, the vice chair wrote that Republicans, quote, ``can 
be especially proud of the city of Milwaukee casting 37,000 
less votes than cast in the 2018 election, with the major 
reduction happening in the overwhelming Black and Hispanic 
areas.''
    He continues, quote, ``This great and important decrease in 
Democratic votes'' was due to a, quote, ``well-thought-out, 
multifaceted plan,'' end quote, that included, quote, ``buying 
Black radio negative commercials run the last few weeks of the 
election cycle.''
    The vice chair has not resigned. He is still the vice chair 
of the Wisconsin Republican Party. The vice chair has not 
resigned from his position on the Wisconsin Election 
Commission.
    No individual, especially one engaged in the administration 
of American elections, should celebrate disparities in voting, 
especially by race. No individual can engage in efforts to 
drive down turnout among voters of color.
    It is incumbent upon every Member of this House to condemn 
racist rhetoric and attempts to disenfranchise voters of color 
by election officials.
    I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment, 
which is a sense of Congress to acknowledge the abhorrent 
language used by an elected official in Wisconsin, being proud 
of the fact that they were able to decrease the amount of Black 
voters in Wisconsin.
    I yield back the balance of my time and urge my colleagues 
to support this amendment.
    Chairman Steil. Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on 
her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. I do, Your Honor--I do, Mr. Chairman.
    I would suggest that the amendment here is not germane 
because civil liberties fall within the jurisdiction and 
province of the Judiciary Committee.
    Chairman Steil. I agree that it is not germane.
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, may I? A parliamentary inquiry.
    Is the point of order--and this has been said several 
times--is it that the amendment is not germane, or is that it 
falls outside of Committee jurisdiction? Those are two 
different things, and I think we have continued to suggest it, 
but those are not the same thing.
    Germaneness relates to whether this is appropriate given 
the context of the conversation. This is clearly about voting, 
and it is clearly about disparities in Black and White voting. 
Jurisdiction is a different issue.
    I just want a clarification from you on whether this is 
germane and that is the question that is being raised in terms 
of the objection or whether it deals with the Committee's 
jurisdiction under Rule X.
    Chairman Steil. I think, following with the House 
Parliamentarian, this is a question of germaneness as to 
whether or not this resides both in our Committee--I think we 
are calling two words for the same thing.
    Mr. Morelle. I do not think it is. I think one is a 
jurisdictional issue as opposed to germaneness.
    Chairman Steil. I think the question from the gentlewoman 
from Florida is germaneness.
    Mr. Morelle. Germaneness. It is not germane because matters 
related, in your view, to civil rights and voting is a--that a 
civil rights issue is different than a voting rights issue?
    Chairman Steil. Civil liberties fall within the 
jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee, per the discretion of 
the Parliamentarian.
    Mr. Morelle. This is a decision by the House 
Parliamentarian, who suggested this was not germane?
    Chairman Steil. Well, I am obviously making this decision 
here. I am interpreting the--I am executing on the 
interpretation from the House Parliamentarian.
    Mr. Morelle. The--very well. I object, but I appreciate 
your explanation.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment will be distributed.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Ms. Sewell----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Chairman Steil. Does the gentlewoman from Florida seek 
recognition?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This amendment would correct the germaneness issue that was 
brought up in my first amendment regarding all States being 
able to offer 14 days of early voting. This is a change from 
the amendment I offered earlier, with the provisions amending 
the Higher Education Act being removed.
    Removing the Higher Education Act portion of that bill 
means that it is squarely within the jurisdiction of this 
Committee and squarely within the jurisdiction of something 
that we can vote on.
    Millions of Americans are given only a single day--I think 
I expressed my concern that Alabama was one of four States that 
does not have any form of early voting.
    By giving folks 14 days of early voting for a period of 
consecutive days, including weekends, beginning on the 15th day 
before the date of the election or even earlier at the option 
of the States, we provide flexibility--flexibility to the 
electorate, flexibility for vote-by-mail and smaller 
jurisdictions.
    This, along with other measures like absentee voting and 
same-day registration, will really help to ensure that, indeed, 
every eligible voter has access to the ballot box.
    This amendment tasks the EAC with developing standards for 
early voting compliance.
    In-person early voting and absentee voting have 
administrative benefits. We know that. We know that it 
encourages shorter lines on election day, that it eases 
congestion, that it improves poll-worker performance, and it 
improves voter satisfaction.
    Given all of that, it is my hope that the Members of this 
Committee, my colleagues on this Committee, will support this 
amendment, which simply does one thing: It offers early voting 
to every State. Forty-six States already have it, but we know 
that four States do not, and that is exactly what this 
amendment would do.
    I ask and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this 
amendment.
    I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    The gentlewoman from Florida?
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I will first note that I share and appreciate my colleague 
Ms. Sewell's commitment to making voting accessible to all 
eligible Americans, and would just note here that the American 
Confidence in Elections Act seeks to do this not by mandating 
that States take certain actions or implement certain 
procedures administering elections but, rather, by creating an 
opportunity for States to determine for themselves which 
practices best serve their needs.
    For this reason, while I appreciate Ms. Sewell's commitment 
to access to voters, I oppose this amendment, as I do not 
believe it is the appropriate role for the Federal Government 
to take in elections administration.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I appreciate the gentlewoman for offering the amendment.
    As I think about article I, section 4 of the Constitution, 
where States have the primary role in establishing time, place, 
and manner of holding elections for Senators and 
Representatives, while Congress has a purely secondary role in 
this space--it must restrain itself from acting improperly and 
unconstitutionally--I do not know that I agree with the 
amendment.
    I think, actually, what we saw as we traveled to Georgia on 
Monday of this week was a State that expanded voter access 
through the ACE Act. When States act in a manner as Georgia 
did, they can actually take this upon themselves, to pass 
strong voter integrity laws.
    We have seen a lot of States, particularly in the 
Northeast, States like Delaware, New York, and others, have 
pretty restrictive voting laws that have an opportunity, I 
think, to really enhance the integrity of the underlying 
elections but also look at some of the ideas that you are 
proposing to see if they are right for their States.
    Because of my reading of the Constitution and my strong 
belief in federalism, I am going to recommend a ``no'' vote on 
the amendment.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Ms. Sewell.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Ms. Sewell. A recorded vote is requested.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested. The clerk 
will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No, ma'am.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Yes.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there is one aye and 
six noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Ms. Sewell of Alabama----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed of.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, the 2020 general election and the 
2022 midterm election saw record shortages of poll workers. 
According to the EAC data, more than half of all jurisdictions 
nationwide had difficulty obtaining a sufficient number of poll 
workers during the 2020 election.
    The poll-worker shortage creates serious problems for our 
democracy. When polling places are understaffed, voters 
experience longer lines, which inevitably means some Americans 
will need to go home without being able to exercise that 
fundamental right to vote.
    The poll-worker shortage threatens to be particularly 
harmful in communities of color, where voters regularly face 
longer lines at the polling place than in White neighborhoods.
    Poll workers serve a very important role in ensuring that 
voters have access to all the services they need and are 
entitled to in order to exercise their freedom to vote.
    When poll workers understand the needs of voters, they can 
provide culturally competent assistance and the assistance 
required by Federal law. This includes services like required 
language materials for voters with limited English proficiency, 
assistance for voters with disabilities, and the provision of 
voting-related services to all voters regardless of gender, 
sexual orientation, and gender identity.
    This amendment would direct the Election Assistance 
Commission to provide grants for States to carry out poll-
worker recruitment and training in an effort to address their 
jurisdiction's shortages and to ensure that poll workers are 
culturally competent in understanding the needs of the 
communities that they serve in.
    I urge all my colleagues to vote in favor of this very 
common-sense and reasonable amendment.
    Thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I would note that Congress has allocated substantive and 
significant funding as it relates to the EAC, hundreds of 
millions of dollars. In the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress 
appropriated $400 million in the CARES Act to prepare for the 
2020 election cycle and its unique challenges.
    As we had a hearing here, we learned where some of those 
grants go. They have gone to political entities--one entity 
that, if you simply went to their website, said that they were 
a proud member of Team Biden. That does not really grow 
confidence in our elections.
    Before we go adding new programs to the EAC to be able to 
administer grants, I would say, let us start by working to 
clean up the current EAC grant-making cycle.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Ms. Sewell.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    Those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed of.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Chairman Steil. Does Ms. Lee reserve a point of order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, long lines and wait times have 
historically made voting difficult, discouraging voting and 
disproportionately impacting voters of color.
    This amendment would eliminate this barrier to voting by 
requiring States to equitably and efficiently operate polling 
places so as to prevent long lines and wait times exceeding 30 
minutes.
    Non-White voters are three times more likely than White 
voters to wait longer than 30 minutes. I will say that again. 
Non-White voters are three times more likely than White voters 
to wait longer than 30 minutes and six times as likely to wait 
more than 60 minutes--six times more likely.
    This is more than simply an urban-rural divide. Even within 
a given urban, suburban, or rural community, lines tend to be 
longer in neighborhoods and precincts with higher 
concentrations of non-White voters.
    One of the reasons why non-White voters wait longer to vote 
is that fewer resources, such as poll workers and voting 
stations, are allocated to precincts with more non-White 
registrants. Policies like precinct closures and shorter voting 
hours can lengthen the lines of polling stations, particularly 
those with a high volume, in areas where non-White voters are.
    Waiting in a long line to vote can make voters less likely 
to turn out in future elections. Voters who wait in long lines 
are less confident in the integrity of our electoral system.
    Nobody should have to wait in line for hours to exercise 
that fundamental, constitutional right to vote. It is 
profoundly unfair that different individuals have fundamentally 
different experiences at the ballot box. This amendment would 
remedy that by ensuring equitable and efficient operation of 
polling stations.
    I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    The gentleman from Georgia.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I agree with my colleague from Alabama. That is why the 
State of Georgia, with Senate Bill 202, fixed this problem.
    I would encourage that what the bill, the underlying bill 
here, does is incentivize the States to do the very things that 
she is advocating in her amendment to do, which is already 
within this, the underlying bill, to encourage States to do 
what the State of Georgia did, which is to make sure that it is 
easy to vote, to give access to ballots to everyone regardless 
of who you are, regardless of where you live, what your 
geographical area is.
    The results have proven successful. The University of 
Georgia, as we heard in a recent Committee hearing, has 
reported the overwhelming success of Senate Bill 202 that 
passed in Georgia.
    I oppose this amendment. I would encourage my friend and 
colleague from Alabama to encourage her State legislature to do 
exactly what Georgia did to ensure that it is easy to vote but 
it is hard to cheat.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Ms. Sewell.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Ms. Sewell. I ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested, and the 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No, ma'am.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there is one aye and 
six noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment fails.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    While the clerk distributes the amendment, I will note to 
Members on the Committee that votes have been called. We will 
continue to monitor the tally of number of votes----
    Ms. Sewell. OK.
    Chairman Steil [continuing]. in place, and we will continue 
on until an appropriate time where we all have time to make it 
to the floor.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida----
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    The gentlewoman from Alabama is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, the COVID-19 pandemic tested 
America's election system during the 2020 election. Election 
officials, poll workers, and voters faced unprecedented 
circumstances and great challenges. The 2020 election proved 
that voters want a variety of options for how to cast their 
ballot, and when you increase access to these options, more 
voters utilize them and access the franchise.
    While many States increased access to a variety of voting 
methods during the pandemic, access was not uniform across the 
country, and many expansions were only temporary. This 
amendment would prohibit States from restricting curbside 
voting, one of the most popular and successful methods used to 
vote during the pandemic.
    Indeed, my constituents uniformly were pleased to be able, 
during this global pandemic, to be able to drop their ballot in 
a curbside voting.
    Curbside voting is safe. It is relatively easy to implement 
and effective in allowing individuals like elders and disabled 
voters, who tend to face barriers in in-person voting, to make 
easier access to their constitutional right to vote.
    This is pretty simple, where this amendment would prohibit 
States from restricting curbside voting. We saw how successful 
it was during the COVID-19 pandemic. This amendment seeks to 
make sure that these options are available to all voters--all 
eligible voters.
    I ask my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, according to article I, section 4 of 
the Constitution, States have the primary role in establishing 
the time, place, and manner of holding elections for Senators 
and Representatives, while Congress has a purely secondary role 
and must restrain itself from acting improperly and 
unconstitutionally.
    State legislatures are the primary and appropriate venues 
to establish rules governing elections. For that reason, I 
oppose the amendment.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    If not, does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her 
point of order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Ms. Sewell.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed?
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested. The clerk 
will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there is one aye and 
six noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, there is an amendment at the 
desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Ms. Sewell of Alabama----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed of.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would ensure that 
no person other than a State or local election official is able 
to challenge an individual's eligibility to register to vote 
unless that challenge is supported by a personal knowledge with 
respect to each individual challenged regarding the grounds for 
ineligibility.
    As we learned from this Committee's hearing just this week 
in Atlanta on Monday, this amendment is urgently needed.
    Just today, a piece in ProPublica detailed how extreme the 
voter challenge situation is in Georgia. According to the 
report, of roughly 100,000 challenges to voter eligibility that 
had been submitted in Georgia, approximately 89,000 have been 
submitted by just 6--just 6--right-wing activists. The other 
11,000 were mostly submitted by another 12 individuals.
    The overwhelming majority of these challenged ballots were 
thrown out, and, therefore, the overwhelming majority of these 
challenged voters are eligible--and indiscriminate challenges 
threaten their right to vote or overwhelm local elected 
officials.
    We must end this madness. The fact that this particular 
bill would allow people to question eligibility and do so 
indiscriminately is a problem. We see that in Georgia. I am not 
sure why we would then approve it in this bill, to nationalize 
or standardize it.
    I am asking my colleagues to support this very simple 
amendment which would protect voters on election day. We must 
end this madness. I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment.
    Chairman Steil. Does the gentlewoman yield back?
    Ms. Sewell. The gentlelady----
    Chairman Steil. The gentlelady yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I appreciate the comments from my colleague. My 
recollection from our hearing on Monday is, after the question 
was asked of the witness regarding the challenges, many of 
those challenges ultimately discovered that a given individual 
was not eligible to vote. It seems like maybe Georgia has a 
system that works for Georgia.
    I would look at--the Federalist side here is that the 
States have primary jurisdiction in this space, not the Federal 
Government, and I think we should be looking at the State level 
for a lot of these remedies.
    Again, the University of Georgia study following Georgia's 
S.B. 202 legislation was a robust survey of people's voting 
experience, and people's voting experience was incredibly 
positive in the State of Georgia. Zero percent of Blacks 
identified themselves as having a poor voting experience.
    We should be celebrating that and looking for ways to build 
upon that success, but doing so at the State level, not looking 
for a Federal takeover of elections.
    I will be opposing this amendment.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Seeing none, does the gentlewoman from Florida maintain her 
point of order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Ms. Sewell.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Ms. Sewell. I request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested, and the 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there is one aye and 
six noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Per my previous comment regarding votes being called, we 
are going to momentarily go into recess, subject to the call of 
the chair.
    I would remind my colleagues on both sides of the aisle 
that we are going to return very promptly following the last 
vote, in the event that there are more amendments to be 
considered. Otherwise, we will move on quickly to final 
passage, with an opportunity for dinner before our late-evening 
vote series. Otherwise, we will plow through.
    With that, the Committee stands in recess, subject to the 
call of the chair.
    [Recess.]
    Chairman Steil. The Committee on House Administration will 
come to order. We will resume where we left off.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mr. Morelle.
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This amendment which I am offering deals with the question 
of what happens when someone like the former President makes 
baseless claims of election fraud, the so-called big lie that 
we often talk about, the American public talks about, which 
really in some respects served as a dual purpose, in our view.
    I think the final report of the January 6th Select 
Committee demonstrates this, that it not only formed the 
foundation of attempts to overturn the 2020 Presidential 
election--and that has been well-documented--which culminated 
in the attacks on the Capitol on January 6th, but it also 
launched a fundraising effort to fund the former President's 
other endeavors and to enrich his associates.
    In addition to the big lie, it is effectively the big rip-
off. The mechanisms for this are clear. The false election 
narrative embedded in fundraising emails and text messages 
amplifying that lie by perpetuating the belief that the 
election was stolen from President Trump and effectuated an 
effort to mislead donors into providing dollars to the campaign 
with the notion that those who are contributing to it would 
effectively be altering the election results: Give us money; we 
are going to get to the bottom of the big lie and the big 
fraud, and we are going to overturn the election, and Donald 
Trump will continue to be President.
    This amendment ensures that candidates like the former 
President cannot profit off of lies by soliciting donations for 
the express and unambiguous purpose of facilitating Federal 
election challenge activities, including recount efforts or 
election contests, if the person knows or has reason to know 
that such activities are frivolous.
    There is a mountain of evidence that was gathered by the 
January 6th Select Committee that demonstrably show the former 
President knew his litigation efforts were frivolous. He lost 
in all relevant litigation, had been advised by his own experts 
and by his Justice Department that the election fraud claims 
were false, and had been told by numerous advisers that he had 
lost and should concede the election, including the Attorney 
General of the United States at the time, William Barr.
    In short, the former President and his campaign ripped off 
supporters by raising hundreds of millions of dollars by 
claiming they would use the money to fight the fraud that they 
knew did not exist and to challenge an election that they knew 
they had lost. It is unconscionable, and the amendment would 
ensure that no candidate could do it again.
    With that, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield my 
time.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I will recognize myself for 5 minutes. I view this 
amendment to stop frivolous actions is sometimes a bit 
frivolous maybe itself. I get concerned about whether or not 
our Federal Government is going to be in the business of making 
these decisions rather than the courts, which already have the 
opportunity to do such.
    I appreciate the interest of my colleague to improve our 
court system, but I will be voting no.
    I yield back.
    Any further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment by 
Mr. Morelle.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it.
    Mr. Morelle. I request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested. The 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are three ayes 
and seven noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not adopted.
    Does any Member wish to seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mr. Morelle of New York. 
Insert after section 3 the following: Section 4. Joe Biden won 
the 2020 election and Brian----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I do not think it 
will take me 5 minutes to get through this. This is, I imagine, 
the simplest and easiest amendment vote we will take today.
    It is purely based on a factual finding. We had several 
witnesses during the nine hearings that we called. There was 
not a single witness who was asked the question--I asked the 
question of each witness who appeared while I was here whether 
or not Joe Biden had won the 2020 election. I believe it was 
Mr. Loudermilk who asked similar questions during the field 
hearing relative to Governor Kemp of Georgia.
    This simply states what is a fact and I think should be 
listed in the report in the bill that those two individuals won 
the elections identified and had witnesses testify to it.
    Given the simplicity and factual nature of the amendment, I 
cannot imagine that it would face serious opposition, and I 
would urge my colleagues to support it.
    With that, I will yield back.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Lee.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Chairman, here I would go back to one thing that I 
think a number of Members of this Committee have pointed to 
here today, which is the proper role of election administration 
lying predominantly with the States, pursuant to our 
Constitution.
    Our States have local election officials and State election 
officials who are responsible for vote tabulation and 
certifying results of elections. For that reason, I do not 
believe this belongs as part of our American Confidence in 
Elections Act and would oppose the amendment.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. Is there any further debate on the 
amendment?
    Mr. Griffith.
    Mr. Griffith. Mr. Chairman, I thought there was an 
objection earlier. I thought it was going to be a germaneness 
objection. How is this germane to the underlying bill?
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman has reserved a point of 
order.
    Mr. Griffith. Right.
    Chairman Steil. We can address that at the end of the 
debate if somebody would like to--if the gentlewoman is 
interested in objecting on a point of order.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman reserve her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. I do, Mr. Chairman. I do believe that this is the 
introduction of an entirely new subject matter that is not 
germane to the underlying text of the bill.
    Chairman Steil. Because this Committee has no jurisdiction, 
the Federal Government has no jurisdiction over point No. 2, I 
think I will agree with the gentlewoman from Florida that it is 
not germane.
    Mr. Morelle. May I, just as it relates to a parliamentary 
inquiry again, and I do want to make a point. Earlier it was 
raised that there is a question of germaneness. Germaneness is 
sort of a broad definition, which is whether a bill is relative 
to the topic at hand, whether the subject is appropriate.
    This is clearly within the topic of elections. It is a 
finding and hearings that this Committee held and unanimity 
among witnesses as to these findings.
    First of all, it falls clearly within our germaneness. 
There is nothing that deals with jurisdiction, so this is not 
even a question of whether there is jurisdiction, because while 
we have Federal elections in our oversight, the truth is Mr. 
Loudermilk introduced the question to Mr. Kemp in the hearing. 
He asked the question of witnesses, and they answered both as I 
think it related to the 2018 and the previous election. This is 
clearly within the jurisdiction.
    I do not want to make--if I may, as part of the 
parliamentary inquiry earlier--I think germaneness is a broad 
topic, and that relates to whether or not the subject at hand 
and everything we have had here so far has been germane.
    The question of jurisdiction is a more narrow one. Under 
rule X, and it relates to the Committees that have jurisdiction 
over all or part of a bill. In the very narrow definition that 
you have used, I just note that the ACE Act itself has 
references to Committee on House Administration, Committee on 
Judiciary, Ways and Means, Science, Space, and Technology, and 
the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Homeland 
Security, Education and the Workforce, Financial Services, 
Oversight and Accountability and the Rules Committee.
    Since we are now using two standards here, one for the 
Democratic amendments and the other for Republican amendments, 
it seems to me we should note that. Here is what I think it is 
really centrally at it.
    It is not about jurisdiction. Truthfully, I do not think it 
is about germaneness. I think it is about the bill before the 
House. The Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute is damaging, 
in our view, to the American public and to the people who want 
to vote and who want to expand the franchise to all Americans.
    Chairman Steil. Let me comment on the parliamentary inquiry 
portion of this.
    Mr. Morelle. Yes, yes.
    Chairman Steil. Because we get into a long debate.
    I think the parliamentary inquiry is the fact that the 
Parliamentarian took the underlying ACE Act and it is in 
multiple jurisdictions. Some Committees may or may not choose 
to mark up their sections of the bill. That is a decision for 
those Committees to reach on their own. Those Committees then 
hold jurisdiction over those portions of this markup. As we 
talk about germaneness, that is one piece of it.
    The second piece is the actual substance of this bill. 
While the Speech and Debate Clause of our--and we can talk 
about anything we would like to in speech and debate. I think 
that is separate of our legislative authority. Our legislative 
authority does not exist as it relates to recognizing or not 
recognizing State Governors.
    I want to yield to my friend the gentleman from Virginia, 
who has a comment.
    Mr. Griffith. I was just going to say I have worked a long 
time to try to tighten up our germaneness rules. I think our 
germaneness rules should not be viewed as something that is so 
broad that if you just mention something you get to put it in.
    It has to be what the subject of the bill is. It has to 
relate to that bill. This amendment or these amendments are so 
wide that you are saying this bill, we can come in and decide 
whether or not Hayes rightfully won the 1876 election?
    Should the South Carolina electors have been counted or not 
counted? What happened to them? What kind of deal did Sam 
Tilden make in order to get Hayes to--or to get the electors 
not to show up? I mean that is clearly not germane, nor is 
this. Samuel J. Tilden may have won the 1876 election, and a 
deal was made. It is important because Tilden was the 
Democratic candidate, Mr. Chairman, and it is believed by many 
historians that Tilden made a deal to let Hayes have the 
Presidency for the lifting of laws in the South that prohibited 
the Jim Crow laws, and that led to the Jim Crow atrocities for 
many years in the Southern States, which is a very important 
issue from a historical standpoint, just as this amendment 
might be important from a historical standpoint but is 
irrelevant to the bill we are debating.
    Chairman Steil. Bringing us back to the parliamentary 
inquiry originally presented, which we have drifted from. I am 
going to bring us all the way back. I am going to rule the 
amendment is not germane.
    Would you like to appeal the ruling or we will continue on?
    Mr. Morelle. Well, I will do this: I will either submit 
that in a subsequent amendment striking the--unless you will 
agree to it, striking the reference to Governor Kemp, which I 
did because Mr. Loudermilk had introduced it, but I am 
perfectly happy to strike that section 2 of the amendment and 
have it----
    Chairman Steil. You can obviously introduce a further 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. That is your objection is to the Kemp 
reference, because it is a State, not a Federal, election. I 
understand that. Thank you.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does any Member seek--does a Member seek recognition? Does 
any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Yes. I am sorry. Mr. Chairman, I have an 
amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mr. Morelle of New York. 
Insert after section 359----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I think this amendment blunts an alarming development we 
could not have imagined before January 6th of 2021. Many of us 
were here that day and understand that a number of people have 
been convicted.
    Eighty Capitol Police officers were assaulted on January 
6th. The Chief of the Capitol Police sat in this room and 
testified to this Committee in another hearing about the 
enduring impact that January 6th has had on the force, both the 
physical and the mental trauma that officers still carry with 
them to this day.
    The alternate history, the version of that attack on the 
Capitol is appalling and minimizes the pain and the suffering 
of the Capitol Police officers as well as Members of Congress, 
staff who were here, and our fellow citizens who witnessed it.
    During a recent CNN town hall, the former President, who is 
now a candidate once again, said he was inclined to pardon many 
of the people convicted of Federal offenses for attacking the 
U.S. Capitol on January 6th. He has begun promising to pardon 
his supporters and using that to solicit dollars in support of 
that.
    This amendment, which prohibits the solicitations either 
seeking a pardon or suggesting an intent to use the dollars to 
pardon specific individuals or categories of individuals 
ensures that candidates like the former President do not enrich 
themselves or their campaigns on the promise to pardon 
insurrectionists or others involved in the January 6th attack 
on the Capitol.
    With that, I will yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I would note that my reading of Federal law is it is 
already illegal to solicit campaign donations for the purposes 
of an official act. This appears duplicative. It also seems 
like something that would hang out over in Judiciary, not 
something that would be before our Committee.
    We can hold a debate about germaneness if you like, but I 
think this is duplicative, I think, as I read, unless somebody 
tells me otherwise. Taking a campaign contribution for the 
purposes of an official act is already illegal, as it should 
be.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. I will withdraw the point of order, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from the gentleman, Mr. Morelle.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. The 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested, and the 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to----
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are three ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member wish to seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment, including the 
scribble.
    The Clerk. An amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mr. Morelle of New York. 
Insert after section 3 the following: Section 4. Joe Biden won 
the 2020 election and Brian Kemp won the 2018----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle. I want to just----
    Chairman Steil. Point of clarification. I believe you read 
through the blue scratched-out, which is on my version, which 
may or may not be on your version, but I believe the blue 
scratched-out removes lines 7 and 8. Is that correct?
    Mr. Morelle. That is correct. Yes, thank you.
    Chairman Steil. Very good. It is a little hard to see it. 
It is a little fast and furious here. House Admin late in the 
evening. Just wanted a point of clarification.
    The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a point of order.
    The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Morelle. Well, I thank you, Mr. Chairman. In response 
to the amendment I made just a few moments ago--and I am sorry, 
Mr. Loudermilk, they refused to accept the fact that your 
inquiry about the election of Brian Kemp could not be included 
because it was not a Federal election.
    Clearly, Joe Biden's election is within the jurisdiction. 
It is germane. Without repeating everything I said earlier, I 
just want to urge people to put this as part of the findings, 
that each of the witnesses who were asked, and I think we 
registered over 20 witnesses on both sides of the aisle who had 
been recommended, who answered the question in the affirmative, 
and I think it should be part of the record.
    With that, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Does any Member wish to seek recognition?
    Ms. Lee. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Chairman, as previously noted on the prior version of 
this amendment, I would just point out that the function of 
tabulating and certifying election results is something that is 
done by the States, and that I believe that this is not 
something that we should be including in the American 
Confidence in Election Act.
    With that, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlelady yields back.
    The gentlewoman from Oklahoma is recognized.
    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, if I may raise a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Please. The gentlewoman reserves a point of 
order--or you have a point of order? The point of order is 
reserved by--but you can comment on the amendment. You can 
comment on the point of order.
    Mrs. Bice. I would like to comment on the amendment.
    Chairman Steil. You strike the last word? The gentlewoman 
is recognized.
    Mrs. Bice. Strike the last word.
    Although I appreciate the gentleman from New York striking 
the second section of this, it is still in the title, which I 
believe would still make this particular legislation not 
germane.
    Chairman Steil. Does the gentlewoman yield back?
    Mrs. Bice. I yield.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    No further debate on the amendment.
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida reserve her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I do. I would assert that this 
amendment is not germane to the underlying bill.
    Chairman Steil. She is reserving her point of order that 
the amendment is not germane to the underlying bill.
    I appreciate the gentlewoman's point of order. In many 
ways, I agree with her. For sake of the discussion, I am going 
to allow it. We will hold a vote on the underlying bill.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, nay.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is requested.
    The clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Yes.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mrs. Torres.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mrs. Torres of California. 
Insert after section 139 the following: Section 139A----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of 
a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee reserves a point of order.
    Mrs. Torres is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, young voters should have access 
to the ballot, especially our college students. My amendment 
today would require polling places on college campuses. I hope 
my colleagues can join me in support of this amendment, and I 
yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    The gentleman from Georgia is recognized.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The question for the author of the amendment, is she 
referring to all colleges, private colleges, technical 
colleges, Christian colleges, any institute of higher 
education?
    Mrs. Torres. The amendment does not discriminate. The 
amendment does not discriminate.
    Mr. Loudermilk. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I mean, it 
is going to take--we really have to have some time to look into 
this. I appreciate the interest in this and what it may intend 
to do, but I think we need to really study this as far as, you 
know, being able to have this at the other institutions. I urge 
a ``no'' vote.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Mr. Griffith is recognized.
    Mr. Griffith. I am going to urge a ``no'' vote also. I 
think that, in cases where you have large university 
communities, the local governments already make those 
decisions. I think, in fact, under the Constitution, it is the 
State and local governments that make those decisions.
    There are many colleges out there that are very small and 
would not have the population to justify the number of poll 
workers that would be required. Even if you used work study 
students, you would not have enough.
    I mean, the college I graduated from has gotten larger than 
when I was there. It now has I think a little over a thousand 
students total on campus, and they have got two campuses. I 
just think that we are getting a little far afield.
    The concept is one that I do not disagree with as far as we 
want to have college students involved, but putting precincts 
out and there doing things actually on the campus, every 
college is different and the registrars in the State 
institutions in those localities and States where those 
colleges, particularly the larger colleges, exist can make 
those decisions if they wish to.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further--the gentleman yields 
back?
    Mr. Griffith. I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. I do, Mr. Chairman. I would assert that this 
amendment is not germane and that it falls within the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Education and Workforce.
    Chairman Steil. As this amends the Higher Education Act, I 
am inclined to agree with the gentlewoman from Florida that the 
amendment is not germane.
    Does any Member wish to be recognized? Does any Member seek 
recognition?
    Mrs. Torres.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mrs. Torres----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of 
a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mrs. Torres is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, law enforcement officers risk 
their personal safety and their lives to protect the American 
public. The work of law enforcement never ends. They work 
shifts on weekends, graveyard, public holidays and even on 
election day.
    This work cuts into the time officers can spend on leisure, 
they spend with their families or participating in our 
democratic systems. Like millions of other Americans, law 
enforcement officers in States that do not allow absentee 
balloting or vote by mail may face difficulties finding the 
time in between their long work hours and other 
responsibilities that they have in their lives to vote.
    This amendment would ensure that law enforcement officers 
are provided as many opportunities as possible to participate 
in our democracy. It would amend ACE Act to provide 
opportunities to vote by absentee or mail ballot to every 
registered or otherwise certified active law enforcement 
officer in the county, regardless of whether the State in which 
they reside currently offers no-excuse mail balloting.
    This amendment will protect the democratic rights of police 
officers and will protect public safety by ensuring that police 
officers are never torn between their desire to cast a ballot 
on election day and their vital duty to ensure our communities 
are safe. I encourage my colleagues to support it.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Mr. D'Esposito, you move to strike the last word?
    Mr. D'Esposito. Yes. Thank you, Chairman.
    While I appreciate, as someone who has served as a law 
enforcement officer for most of my adult life, I appreciate the 
thoughts from our colleagues wanting to make sure that those 
men and women who wear the uniform have every opportunity and 
right to cast a ballot on election day.
    With the exception of four States, every State in the Union 
has early voting. For the 16 years that I served as a member of 
the New York City Police Department as a detective, I made sure 
that every one of those years I made sure that I was able to 
cast a ballot in an election.
    I think that, while I understand and appreciate the chance 
for law enforcement to have every opportunity to vote, I 
believe those men and women who wear the uniform right now do 
just that.
    If you notice around this country, law enforcement unions 
make every attempt to have the men and women who fall under 
their banner out to vote. They have large groups making sure 
that each and every year they are out not only casting ballots 
but supporting those that are running for office that support 
law enforcement.
    I appreciate my colleague, but I do not believe that as 
part of this American Confidence in Election Act this is 
something that we need. I think law enforcement officers 
throughout this country make every effort that they need each 
and every election year to cast a ballot to vote for those that 
they believe support law enforcement.
    I yield back. Thank you.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman is recognized.
    Mr. Morelle. Just to say--and I appreciate the gentleman's 
perspective. I think members of law enforcement do make every 
attempt to participate, but there is certainly no guarantee 
that on a given day, an election day, particularly in those 
States that do not--like Alabama, as Ms. Sewell has indicated, 
where they do not have any form of early voting, something 
could happen, which clearly puts a member of law enforcement in 
a position where they have to be on duty and just cannot get to 
a polling place that day.
    While there may be union contracts, relying on a 
negotiation with a union to have given an opportunity to a 
member of law enforcement to vote I think is insufficient. I 
think it ought to be clearly identified in Federal law.
    I think this is something that is worthy of consideration, 
and I would urge support for the amendment.
    With that, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I will yield to the gentleman.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Thank you. I will be quick.
    I think with that thought process in mind, I obviously 
missed many holidays and events with my family because of the 
job, but I also do not believe that giving mail opportunities 
will make sure that every one of them casts their ballot 
either.
    While we are focused on law enforcement officers, do we 
expand this to people who work in hospitals, to doctors, to 
anyone who works 24/7, firefighters, sheriffs, those in jails?
    I think that, like I said, while I appreciate the thought 
behind making sure law enforcement officers have the right to 
vote, I do not believe that it is a part of the American 
Confidence in Elections Act.
    I yield back. Thank you.
    Chairman Steil. I would add to the comments from the 
gentleman from New York, maybe it is an opportunity for other 
States to look at the voter integrity legislation passed by 
Georgia, which addresses a lot of these challenges.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Seeing none, does the gentlewoman from Florida reserve a 
point of order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The question is on the amendment.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    Those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I request a recorded vote.
    Ms. Torres. I request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote has been requested by two 
Members, and the clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition? Mrs. Torres.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of 
a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman----
    Ms. Lee. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mrs. Torres is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, first responders keep our 
communities safe and healthy. Their jobs are dangerous and they 
are very difficult. Beyond the taxing physical work that being 
a first responder entails, the job also requires extended and 
intensive work hours that extend beyond the normal 9 to 5.
    This amendment would amend the ACE Act to provide 
opportunities to vote by absentee or mail ballot to every first 
responder in the country, regardless of whether the State in 
which they currently reside offers no-excuse mail balloting.
    I encourage my colleagues to support this essential 
amendment.
    Chairman Steil. Yield back?
    Mrs. Torres. I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I would say almost all the same arguments we just made 
moments ago on the previous will be reserved for this amendment 
as well. Maybe we should have done two roll calls at the same 
time, as was suggested by my colleagues. I will be voting 
against this amendment as well.
    I yield back.
    Does the gentlewoman from--is there further debate on the 
amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Mrs. Torres.
    All in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote is requested.
    The clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mrs. Torres.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will please distribute the 
amendment.
    The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute.
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee reserves a point of order.
    Mrs. Torres is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, teachers across our Nation do an 
indispensable job. Teachers make personal and financial 
sacrifices for the education of our youth. They nurture the 
future of our Republic. In addition to their duties in the 
classroom, teachers often work unseen long hours, coaching 
teams, grading student work, leading student clubs and 
fellowships, preparing curriculum and lesson plans and 
mentoring individual pupils.
    This amendment would amend the ACE Act to provide 
opportunities to vote by absentee or mail ballot to every 
teacher in the country, regardless of whether the State in 
which they currently reside offers no-excuse mail balloting.
    I encourage all my colleagues to support this essential 
amendment, and I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Lee is recognized.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I will begin by saying I certainly appreciate and share our 
colleague Mrs. Torres' appreciation for our Nation's teachers 
and the value that they provide to our students.
    However, State legislatures here are the primary venues to 
establish rules for governing elections as it applies to 
specific groups or generally. Any regulation or legal structure 
policy related to the provision of mail ballots should be left 
to State legislatures to decide for the residents of their 
respective States.
    For that reason, I oppose the amendment.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Mrs. Torres.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, signify by saying no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested.
    The clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Do any Members seek recognition?
    Mrs. Torres.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mrs. Torres of California. 
Insert after section 3 the following: Section 4. Sense of----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of 
a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee reserves a point of order.
    Mrs. Torres is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, all of us remember the deadly 
devastation that occurred on January 6, 2021, when violent 
insurrectionists terrorized these grounds and breached the U.S. 
Capitol's building, our security, which was incited by the 
former President, Donald Trump, during a joint session of 
Congress to certify the electoral college vote for President 
Joe Biden. My amendment would add a sense of Congress on the 
peaceful transfer of power.
    I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield 
back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    This is already the law, so I do not think you need a sense 
of Congress for it. I will be voting against this.
    Is there any further debate on the--I yield back. Is there 
any further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman insist on her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Mrs. Torres.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested.
    The clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Kilmer.
    Mr. Kilmer. I have an amendment. It is relating to special 
election requirements.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Mr. Kilmer's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    The gentleman Mr. Kilmer is recognized for 5 minutes in 
support of the amendment.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This amendment relates to a topic that came up during the 
hearing we had with the Capitol Police and also some of the 
work that the Modernization Subcommittee has done.
    In the last Congress, we had a hearing related to the 
continuity of Congress, which is a morbid topic and one we do 
not like to think a lot about. God forbid there is an attack on 
several Members of Congress.
    When we had the hearing in this hearing room during the 
Modernization Committee, Mike Bishop testified that he was on 
the baseball field and on the train that derailed on the way to 
the conference retreat. Even more horrifying is the potential 
for a mass casualty event, State of the Union, that type of 
thing.
    Our existing rules would leave us without a functional 
Government for a period of at least a few months while special 
elections occur. Obviously, you know, at a time of national 
crisis, that is a real problem.
    What is more, under the existing laws, States are required 
to hold special elections within 49 days if there were a mass 
casualty event. When the Modernization Committee had a hearing 
on this, we heard from several State election officials that 
they just could not do it, that if you think about the filing 
period, printing ballots, making sure you are getting ballots 
to military voters, then counting the ballots, then general 
election, same thing, right? They said they just--it was not 
feasible.
    This amendment simply would allow us to learn more about 
the ability of States or the inability of States to meet that 
current requirement.
    I will just say additionally and separately--and I know I 
have talked to Ms. Bice about this. I have talked to Chairman 
Steil about this. I have talked to the chair of Constitution 
Subcommittee of Judiciary, which exists, and let them know, you 
know, I want to continue this conversation around how we ensure 
the operation of this body in the aftermath of a crisis. I 
certainly invite all of my colleagues' collaboration on that.
    We are hoping to get a bill put together and invite you to 
join me. This is simply a GAO study to look at the capacity to 
meet the current requirements and what would happen if there 
were the need for this urgent special election.
    I would urge support and yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    We have had a great conversation on this, substantively 
trying to solve a pretty substantive and real issue. I 
appreciate the seriousness with which you brought this 
amendment. I think it is actually something completely worthy 
of the study. I think the way you presented it is very 
thoughtful.
    I am going to urge support of the amendment. Maybe then we 
go out on a kumbaya moment after bipartisanship, but that is up 
to your side, not mine.
    I will recognize Mrs. Bice for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank my 
colleague and Subcommittee Chair Kilmer for bringing this 
forward. I think, particularly for Oklahoma, we have some 
challenges, because we do not allow for appointments, interim 
appointments should a Member be unavailable to serve in that 
capacity. Looking at how long those timelines would be for 
someone to be replaced I think is important and necessary.
    I want to thank you for bringing this forward and for your 
seriousness in this conversation, and I will be definitely 
supporting the bill and I encourage my colleagues to do the 
same.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Dr. Murphy is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Dr. Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I want to thank Mr. Kilmer for his serious amendment. It is 
deeply appreciated that we do this seriously. I was in a 
special election. I was replaced. The Democratic Governor kept 
it as long as possible until the election could be held to 
replace his seat, to replace the Republican seat.
    Again, I appreciate you taking this hearing seriously and 
this serious amendment, and I am happy to support it.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Mr. Loudermilk is recognized for 5 minutes to strike the 
last word.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I appreciate Mr. Kilmer bringing this up. As Mike Bishop, I 
was on the baseball field at the same time. I was on the same 
train. That really gave us a moment to pause and think. There 
could have been a significant loss of the number of Members in 
Congress after that event had not things gone the way--they 
could have easily gone a lot worse.
    I appreciate this amendment. I think it is well thought 
out. It is not rushing into it but asking for a study for us to 
come up with some solution, because continuity of this branch 
of Government of our article I powers is going to be very 
important as we move forward.
    I urge support. I think this is a good amendment, and we 
can, on a bipartisan basis, agree on this. Thank you.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Mr. Kilmer.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The 
amendment is adopted. I had to think twice there. We are on a 
roll.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. I appreciate your work on it.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mr. Morelle of New York----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    There has been a great deal of conversation around the 
question of security in elections. One of the great threats to 
election security is in the question of foreign government 
interference and when a foreign government tries to intervene 
in our elections.
    Clearly, I think most people, most Americans would agree 
that, when that happens, it ought to be reported to law 
enforcement, the FBI, the FEC, and that is the norm that most 
campaigns should already follow.
    This proposed amendment simply codifies that norm. The 
amendment requires candidates and officials, agents and 
employees of political committees registered with the FEC to 
report certain contacts with foreign governments and those 
closely affiliated with foreign governments, such as foreign 
political parties, those on the sanctions list, but only when 
those contacts involve discussions about illegal campaign 
spending or coordination or collaboration in connection with an 
election.
    The duty to report applies to contacts that are with a 
covered foreign national, which is defined as a foreign 
government or foreign political party, an agent of such foreign 
government or political party, and any person on the list of 
specifically designated nationals blocked persons maintained by 
the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the Department of the 
Treasury; in other words, individuals such as oligarchs on the 
sanctions list.
    Just to be clear, to guard against an overreach here, the 
bill has a knowledge requirement. In order to trigger the FBI 
and FEC reporting requirements, a candidate or the individual 
who is affiliated with the campaign needs to know, to have 
reason to know or reasonably believe that a conversation is 
with a covered national, a foreign government, and the other 
folks that I identified, and must know or have reason to know 
or reasonably believe that it involves an offer for unlawful 
campaign spending or coordination or collaboration with a 
foreign government.
    The amendment requires campaigns and other political action 
committees to establish compliance and training programs so 
that everyone is on notice about the requirements. This, as I 
said at the top, is essentially the norm that most people 
follow, but this would codify that norm.
    I would urge adoption of the amendment. With that, I yield 
back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Mrs. Bice is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I am going to be voting ``no'' on this amendment for the 
simple fact that, Mr. Morelle, I am disappointed that you would 
put forward an amendment, a 15-page amendment with serious 
implications without any ability to really research or ask any 
questions about the impact of this potential amendment.
    For that reason and that reason alone, I am voting no.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Dr. Murphy is recognized for 5 minutes to strike the last 
word.
    Dr. Murphy. I will just make one point, that, in D.C., now 
foreigners are allowed to vote. And this is asking foreign 
people not to interfere in our election, so it is a little bit 
hypocritical to me.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will vote no.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    Again, this has some of the penalties that give me pause as 
it relates to germaneness. I think there is substance here, so 
I am inclined to allow it to go through, to allow the vote to 
take place.
    I would note in the ACE Act, there are really good robust 
provisions of closing loopholes of foreign interference, of 
money coming into U.S. elections, in particular where foreign 
nationals are currently, through a loophole, allowed to 
contribute into 501(c)(4) entities, which can then launder 
those funds into a super PAC that have direct impact on our 
elections. The ACE Act closes that loophole. That I think is a 
really thoughtful approach.
    This I think is worthy of our future consideration, and I 
would be more than happy to work with the Member, Mr. Morelle, 
as we look at other ways in addition to the work we are doing 
in the ACE Act to prevent foreign interference in our 
elections, which is a project worthy of our time.
    That said, I will be voting no on the underlying amendment.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Seeing none, does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on 
her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. I withdraw the point of order, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Mr. Morelle.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, there were some late yeses, 
but the noes overwhelmed, and the amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote is ordered, and the clerk 
will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. Can I have an inquiry?
    Is there a heater in that room? Is that why the people are 
going back there?
    Dr. Murphy. No. I am 60 and I have a prostate problem.
    Chairman Steil. There being no parliamentary inquiry, there 
will be no further debate on that topic.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Sewell has an amendment at the desk, 
and the clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee reserves a point of order.
    Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The First and the 14th Amendment protect the freedom to 
vote for all Americans and bar States and localities from 
unduly burdening that right. In particular, we must make voting 
accessible for veterans who have served our country and 
defended against these threats to American democracy.
    The ACE Act threatens to interfere with their right by 
taking away a crucial method of casting a ballot for voters who 
cannot travel to the polling station on election day by 
requiring State-banned community ballot collection in order to 
make use of Federal funds for elections.
    Community ballot collection, or what the ACE Act refers to 
as ``ballot harvesting,'' is when a voter designates a third 
party, such as a family member, a friend, neighbor, caretaker, 
or other community member, to deliver their mailed vote or 
absentee ballot in a sealed envelope to the post office ballot 
dropbox or election officials on their behalf. This provides 
voters with a safe and accessible way to cast a ballot.
    This option is particularly important for voters who cannot 
travel to the polling station due to a disability or their 
health, as well as for military and first responders who, due 
to the demands of their work, may not be able to get to the 
polling stations on election day.
    This amendment would modify the ACE Act's ban on the use of 
Federal funds for elections in States that permit community 
ballot collections by creating an exemption for wounded or 
disabled voters, allowing wounded or disabled voters to 
designate an individual of their choice to deliver their voted 
ballot to the appropriate election official, ballot dropbox, or 
the post office.
    It would protect wounded and disabled veterans' freedom to 
vote by giving them the power to choose how they will cast 
their ballots, including the freedom to ask a trusted 
individual of their choice to deliver their voted ballot to the 
appropriate election official if they so choose.
    This is a common-sense amendment, and I ask my colleagues 
to support it.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Lee is recognized to strike the last word.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would strike the last 
word. There are several points that I would make that I think 
are pertinent to this particular amendment.
    First is, it bears noting that the American Confidence in 
Elections Act actually contains a number of provisions to 
ensure that we are allowing our men and women who are serving 
overseas, our military members, to vote securely and that we 
are making voting accessible to them. It directs the GAO to 
conduct an analysis of military voting administration and 
report those findings to Congress.
    On the particular subject of ballot harvesting, I would 
note that we know that this process can, in some instances, 
result in coercion and intimidation, and it is not something 
that is encouraged by the ACE Act.
    Finally, I would note again that this type of voting, to 
involve ourselves in the methods and process of voting in the 
States, is an improper use of our Federal authority, where 
clearly our United States Constitution leaves to States the 
principal responsibility for administering elections.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman insist on her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. I withdraw the point of order, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote has been requested. The 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and seven noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Ms. Sewell. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Sewell has an amendment at the desk, 
and the clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Ms. Sewell of Alabama. In 
section 908(a) of the Help America Vote Act of----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee has reserved a point of order.
    The gentlewoman, Ms. Sewell, is recognized for 5 minutes in 
support of the amendment.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, we just discussed the importance 
of guaranteeing wounded and disabled veterans the freedom to 
vote in the manner that they choose. This applies equally to 
voters with a disability.
    This amendment would modify the ACE Act's ban on the use of 
Federal funds for elections in States that permit community 
ballot collection by creating an exception for voters with 
disabilities and allowing them to designate an individual of 
their choice to deliver their voted ballot to the appropriate 
election official, ballot dropbox, or post office.
    As I said before, the First and the 14th Amendment of the 
Constitution protects the fundamental right to vote, including 
the right of all Americans to vote safely and accessibly.
    This is a common-sense amendment, and I am asking all of my 
colleagues to vote in favor of it.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Lee is recognized to strike the last word.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    As we noted on the last amendment, there are two primary 
reasons that I would oppose this particular amendment.
    One, the American Confidence in Elections Act actually 
seeks to discourage the practice of ballot harvesting. We know 
that, in some cases, this practice is abused. It can be used to 
coerce or intimidate voters.
    Second, this is the type of decision that is soundly left 
to the discretion of States, who do have primary responsibility 
for deciding the time, place, and manner of their elections, 
including the methods by which their citizens may lawfully 
vote.
    For these reasons, Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Seeing none, does the gentlewoman insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Seeing none, the question is now on the 
amendment.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Ms. Sewell. I am going to ask for a recorded vote, please.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested. The 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and seven noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member wish to seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Steil. Mr. Morelle is recognized.
    Mr. Morelle. Yes, sir. I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mr. Morelle of New York----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee reserves a point of order.
    Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. I think it is my amendment.
    Chairman Steil. I apologize.
    Mr. Morelle. No, it is OK.
    Ms. Sewell. You are so used to me giving amendments.
    Chairman Steil. You know, everybody is jumping in.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Morelle. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This amendment is a sense of Congress on a deeply 
disturbing issue for many Americans.
    Most Americans recognize the harm that the Dobbs decision 
has inflicted and will continue to inflict on American 
democracy and the ability of women to participate equally in 
the political process.
    The participation of women in the American democracy is 
essential to the success of this Nation. When women succeed, 
America succeeds.
    As I mentioned earlier, I come from Rochester, New York, 
home of Susan B. Anthony, who devoted her life to the equality 
of women in this country and fought very hard, was arrested for 
having participated in the 1872 election.
    The United States Constitution now makes it clear. The 19th 
Amendment, which Susan B. Anthony fought so hard for, bars the 
Federal Government and the States from abridging or denying the 
right to vote on account of sex.
    The amendment was hard-fought, and it represents our 
country's commitment to ensuring women can participate wholly 
and equally in American democracy. It is Congress's 
responsibility to ensure women have equal access to the ballot. 
The 19th Amendment gives us the authority to enact legislation 
enforcing its provisions.
    The Supreme Court's decision last June in Dobbs v. Jackson 
Women's Health Organization, which ripped away the fundamental 
right to bodily autonomy for women in the United States, sets 
this country on a dangerous backslide in its commitment to 
women's equal participation in American democracy.
    The decision and the flood of anti-choice laws passed in 
its wake are a threat to the health of women and American 
democracy. Abortion rates are essential to democracy. Threats 
to democracy are intimately intertwined with attacks on 
reproductive freedom. The States that have introduced anti-
voter laws over the past decade are the same ones who have 
enacted anti-choice policies. The pattern is clear.
    For example, Texas's omnibus voter suppression bill, SB 1, 
took effect the same day as its near-total abortion ban, SB 8. 
Missouri was similarly one of the first States to outlaw nearly 
all abortions when its 2019 trigger law took effect in the wake 
of Dobbs, at the same time the State passed its omnibus voter 
suppression bill, parts of which were later enjoined by a State 
court for violating the Missouri constitution. Georgia's near-
total abortion ban also coincided with the passage of SB 202, 
one of the most restrictive anti-voter laws in the country.
    Women of color are disproportionately harmed by these 
measures and these policies.
    For the health of American democracy, we must ensure women 
have the ability to participate fully and equally in the 
political process and to exercise their freedom to vote. By 
recognizing the harm done by the Dobbs decision, this amendment 
is a step toward that goal.
    I encourage all of my colleagues to support this very 
important and sensible amendment.
    With that, I yield.
    Chairman Steil. Does any other Member seek recognition?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. I do, Mr. Chairman.
    A point of order here, because this amendment is not 
germane to the American Confidence in Elections Act, and it 
falls outside of the jurisdiction of this Committee and belongs 
more appropriately in the consideration of the Judiciary 
Committee.
    Chairman Steil. In the opinion of the chair, I agree. The 
amendment is not germane.
    Mr. Morelle. I appeal the ruling of the chair.
    Chairman Steil. I move to lay the appeal on the table.
    Oh, actually, would----
    Ms. Lee. I move to lay the appeal on the table, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. Thank you very much.
    The question is on the motion to table. The motion is not 
debatable.
    As many are in favor of the motion to table, say aye.
    Those opposed, say no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. The question is on the motion to table. The 
clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes aye.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. Yes.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes aye.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes aye.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. Yes.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes aye.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes no.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes no.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes no.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are seven ayes 
and four noes.
    Chairman Steil. The motion to table is approved. The 
amendment is dispensed with.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman has an amendment at the desk. 
The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The amendment that is before us is similar to one that we 
heard from Ms. Sewell that related to the importance of 
ensuring, in that case, wounded and disabled veterans and 
others with disabilities had the freedom to vote in the manner 
in which they choose.
    Voters who live in nursing homes, skilled nursing 
facilities, assisted-living facilities, likewise, commonly 
struggle to make it to polling places due to health issues, 
physical health issues, or lack of access to adequate 
transportation.
    In my home State--and I appreciate the constant reminders 
of the roles States play in elections. In my State, there is no 
impediment on people being able to help individuals cast 
absentee ballots.
    This bill in front of us, the ACE Act, would, in fact, 
reduce or eliminate Federal funding for any State, like New 
York, that chooses to allow senior citizens to get help and 
others to get help when they submit their ballots through the 
mail by virtue of absentee ballot.
    Despite the claims to the contrary, in the nine hearings we 
held, I did not hear one single piece of evidence or knowledge 
of any coercion in those hearings by people who cast absentee 
ballots and were assisted by others.
    To me, this is something that should be left to the States. 
I think we ought to ensure that people living all across this 
country who live in nursing homes, skilled nursing facilities, 
that we enable those voters to safely and securely exercise 
their vote.
    The amendment modifies the ACE Act's ban on the use of 
Federal funds for elections in States that permit community 
ballot collection by creating an exception for voters who live 
in these facilities and allowing them to designate an 
individual of their choice to deliver their voted ballot to the 
appropriate election official, ballot dropbox in those States 
that have them, or to the post office.
    Again, I would say, I have significantly large communities 
in my community--Jewish Senior Life, St. Ann's Senior Life, the 
Episcopal Home, many not-for-profit nursing homes--and those 
individuals do help residents of those homes to be able to cast 
their ballot.
    I want to make sure that we continue to allow Federal funds 
to be used to support those not only in my State that allow it 
but all across America. I think this is the right thing to do 
to ensure that people continue to exercise their franchise.
    With that, I will yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    The gentlewoman from Florida, Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    On this provision, this is another amendment that relates 
to the concept of ballot harvesting. I would note here, too, I 
also represent a State with a large population of seniors and 
voters who are in assisted-living facilities and others, and 
would note here that this practice, we know, has been abused 
and can lead to inappropriate levels of pressure that are 
placed on voters to hand in their ballots and, in some cases, 
can also lead to coercion, intimidation, and abuse. These are 
some of our most vulnerable voters.
    I do oppose this amendment and the practice of ballot 
harvesting, particularly as it relates to our seniors and those 
who are most in need of protection.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I would just note to the gentleman, I appreciate the 
interest in making sure we get seniors to vote. Absolutely 
essential. The key here is getting it right.
    In the State of Wisconsin, in my congressional district, 
there is actually an issue at a nursing home as it relates to 
this specific issue.
    It is all about making sure we are empowering the States to 
get this right so that people are able to vote but that that is 
not done in a way that is coercive to anyone, in particular 
some of our most vulnerable people, those in the senior 
population who may be at a nursing home or an assisted-living 
facility.
    We also have mechanisms inside the ACE Act to make sure we 
are providing these resources to senior citizens. The key here 
is that the States should be taking the lead.
    I will be opposing the amendment.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment by 
Mr. Morelle.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. The 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote has been requested. The 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Chairman Steil. Does anyone wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Chairman Steil. Does the gentlewoman from Florida----
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This amendment, in line with the last few amendments that 
we have offered, tries to identify the groups of voters who 
have particular challenges at times getting to the ballot and 
may need to vote by ballot, absentee ballot or otherwise, and 
it will allow them to identify an individual that would help 
them with the community ballot collection. This one relates to 
Active Duty military personnel.
    You know, we continue to talk about how we need to protect 
our brave military members, who put their lives literally on 
the line for this country. This amendment does help them make 
sure that they also fulfill their responsibilities and protects 
their rights to vote.
    The amendment would help ensure Active Duty servicemembers 
have the freedom to choose how to return their voted ballot, 
allowing them the opportunity to select a trusted individual to 
deliver their ballot, and to make certain that Federal funds 
are not restricted to those States, again trying to ensure that 
States have the right to do what they think is the appropriate 
thing, and they should not be barred from being able to allow 
individuals to help in the delivery of their voted ballot.
    I would ask this very reasonable amendment to be considered 
favorably.
    With that, I will yield.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Lee. Yes.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee is recognized.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I would just like to begin by acknowledging and commending 
the Ranking Member's concern for making sure that our UOCAVA 
voters, namely our men and women serving overseas, have access 
to and the ability to participate in our Nation's elections.
    I would note that the American Confidence in Elections Act 
actually contains numerous provisions specifically related to 
ensuring that we are delivering those ballots, that we are 
getting those ballots cast and getting them returned in a way 
that is efficient, that is secure, and that provides access to 
our overseas and military voters.
    We are commissioning a study directing the GAO to conduct a 
full analysis of military voting administration and report 
their findings back to us so that Congress may review and 
address anywhere that we need to improve that process for the 
benefit of the men and women who are serving this country 
overseas.
    So----
    Mr. Morelle. Would the gentlelady yield just for a 
question?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    I will at this time, Mr. Chairman, yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Sewell. I----
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. I would like to yield my time to the Ranking 
Member.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Ms. Sewell.
    I will just make the point again that we appreciate the 
study and all the language dedicated to our commitment.
    Notwithstanding, it still seems to me that, under the bill 
that you have asked us to consider, Federal funds would be 
prohibited to be used in those States where individuals could 
be tapped by an Active Duty military personnel to help them 
cast a ballot. I do not think there is any dispute on that.
    What we are suggesting is that those barriers to voting 
should be lifted, particularly for certain groups of Americans, 
and we think Active Duty personnel should be included in that.
    With that, I yield back to Ms. Sewell and thank her for her 
indulgence.
    Ms. Sewell. I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Seeing none, does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on 
her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. I withdraw the point of order, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Mr. Morelle.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested. The 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, in line with previous attempts 
to make certain that those individuals who may have challenges 
in casting ballots and choose to vote by absentee or by mail be 
allowed to have people assist them in the collection and 
submission of those ballots, this amendment deals with first 
responders.
    We talk often about the importance of first responders. You 
know, many are tied up now for days, if not weeks, with the 
kinds of threats that the climate crisis has delivered--
wildfires or floods and natural disasters--and need to cast 
their ballots because they are on duty and they are responding 
to crises.
    This would allow individuals to designate a trusted 
individual to be able to cast their ballot for them. Any 
barriers placed in the way of that by the ACE Act should be 
eliminated. I hope we would have colleagues join us in this 
common-sense amendment to the bill.
    With that, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Lee is recognized to strike the last word for 5 
minutes.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I would just note that this proposed amendment is another 
effort at provisions related to ballot harvesting, which, for 
the reasons previously stated on prior amendments, is something 
that is a practice that can and has been abused around our 
country. It can lead to inappropriate levels of pressure on 
voters and is something that, in many States, States are 
seeking to discourage as opposed to encourage.
    It is not an amendment that I would support as a helpful 
provision related to the American Confidence in Elections Act.
    Of course, as has been previously noted as to provisions 
related to ballot harvesting, the manner and collection of 
ballots, receipt of ballots, is something that is appropriately 
left to States to individually determine, pursuant to our 
Constitution.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman insist on her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Mr. Morelle.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested. The 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member wish to seek recognition?
    Ms. Sewell. I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Sewell has an amendment at the desk. 
The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ms. Sewell's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee reserves a point of order.
    Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman, this amendment strikes in its 
entirety subtitle D of the bill, through which Republicans 
would impose their wish list of restrictive voting policies 
upon the District of Columbia.
    Mr. Chairman, elections in Washington, D.C., are among the 
most accessible and democratic in our country. For example, 
their pro-voter-registration policies have resulted in D.C. 
having the highest voter registration rates in the Nation, at 
96 percent.
    They are also among the most secure. Even the conservative 
Heritage Foundation's Election Fraud Cases data base lists zero 
instances of voter fraud in Washington, D.C., since 1979.
    If elections in Washington, D.C., lack integrity, it is not 
because of fraud or insecure election procedures. It is because 
half a million D.C. residents are being denied full voting 
representation in Congress.
    If we are being honest, we know that this section of the 
ACE Act is not really about D.C. It is about providing a 
template for other States to impose extreme, suppressive, 
restrictive voter laws. By overhauling D.C.'s voting laws 
through the ACE Act, the Republicans would strip away many of 
these essential tools that allow so many D.C. residents to 
participate in our democracy.
    Mr. Chairman, Washington, D.C., has the right to political 
self-determination.
    I strongly urge all of my colleagues to support this 
amendment.
    I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Mr. D'Esposito. Chairman, if I may?
    Chairman Steil. Mr. D'Esposito is recognized for 5 minutes 
to strike the last word.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Yes. I just want to share a few facts on 
elections in D.C., who--they have clearly been a disaster.
    In 2012, the District of Columbia was completely unprepared 
for early voters. Several polling places had only one or two 
voting machines, forcing voters to stand in line for hours. 
Polling places were not accessible for the disabled. Election 
workers were poorly trained, and some voters were given ballots 
with incorrect addresses, which allowed them to vote in races 
in other wards.
    In the 2014 Democratic primary, voters had to wait for 
hours after polls closed before receiving meaningful election 
returns because of problems with voting machines.
    After the 2014 midterms, an audit of the election found: 23 
of the 89 precincts visited did not have the minimum number of 
poll workers; 168 workers did not even show up to work; 37 of 
89 precincts inspected were not fully accessible to the 
disabled; 57 of the 89 featured equipment issues affecting a 
wide range of election day technology.
    In 2016, the D.C. auditor released a report that found 
that, in 2015, the Board of Elections sent out written notices 
to 260,000 inactive voters through the U.S. Postal Service.
    I can go on and on.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Lee is recognized for 5 minutes to strike the last 
word.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    One of the great opportunities in the American Confidence 
in Elections Act is that, when we know best practices, when we 
have had the opportunity to look around the States and see what 
is working, that we can use those practices here.
    My colleague, Mr. D'Esposito, just outlined some of the 
challenges, some of the failures that we have seen in District 
of Columbia elections. The ACE Act gives us an opportunity to 
take the District of Columbia from a place that it is 
demonstrating significant and in some cases very concerning 
failures and, instead, make it a model of good election 
policies and practices that can be an example for the Nation of 
strong policy and implementation.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Steil. Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes to 
strike the last word.
    Mr. Morelle. Yes, sir, to strike the last word.
    I would just note that, for all the conversation about 
local control, State control, the District of Columbia, which 
desperately would like to be a State, which we have supported 
on this side of the aisle and will continue to do that--but the 
principles should be the same. What happened to self-
determination? What happened to those at that level being able 
to make judgments about how to run their elections?
    We will micromanage only in places where we find it 
convenient to micromanage; otherwise, we should keep our hands 
off of that. I think this attempt to micromanage Washington in 
its elections, particularly in light of reports, such as the 
Heritage report, which found zero deficiencies in the way they 
conduct their elections, to be a dramatic overreach. I think 
there is a double standard which is clearly on display here.
    With that, I will yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there any further debate on the amendment?
    Dr. Murphy is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Dr. Murphy. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I will just say this: Any municipality that has allowed 
foreign nationals such as members of the Chinese Communist 
Party or Russian nationals, those who seek our downfall, to 
vote in local elections, in my opinion, have forfeited their 
ability to contest the Constitution, which clearly states D.C. 
is not allowed to be a State.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Mrs. Torres is recognized for 5 minutes to strike the last 
word.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment.
    It is really unfortunate to hear my colleagues, on one 
hand, pretend to support voters and voter outreach and, on the 
other hand, oppress D.C. voters.
    D.C. voters are the perfect example of taxation without 
representation. The community here in D.C. has more residents 
than some of our States--some States combined, I would dare 
say.
    It is really unfortunate. I urge my colleagues to support 
this amendment.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate?
    Mr. Griffith is recognized for 5 minutes to strike the last 
word.
    Mr. Griffith. Speaking to the amendment, the U.S. 
Constitution, related to D.C.: ``. . . to exercise exclusive 
legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such district not 
exceeding 10 square miles as may, by cession of particular 
States and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the 
Government of the United States, and to exercise like authority 
over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of 
the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of 
forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful 
buildings. And''----
    Now, I have referenced that because I recognize the 
concerns that have been raised here with folks not having the 
right to vote, but D.C. is a special circumstance referenced 
and created in our Constitution. A section of Virginia, my home 
State, was given to be part of D.C., as was a section of 
Maryland given to be part of the District of Columbia, the seat 
of Government.
    Trying to solve these problems several years ago--and I 
have reintroduced it in this Congress--I came up with a bill 
that crosses all the t's and dots all the i's, and it allows 
for a retrocession--in other words, a return--of the land that 
came from Maryland to be returned to Maryland.
    Now, as you all may recall, the section of Virginia that 
Virginia ceded to the Federal Government to become the seat of 
Government, the District of Columbia, was retrocessed in the 
1800's, the 19th century.
    I think, to solve the issue that comes up on voting and 
having the right to vote of so many citizens--it was never 
anticipated there would be this many citizens. It is not right 
to suddenly create a whole new State out of an existing State. 
Even though Maryland ceded the land, or, as the words say, 
cession of the particular land, to the Federal Government, it 
did so for the right of a Federal Government-controlled area to 
be the seat of Government.
    If we want to re-look at that, I suggest people read my 
bill. It is a nice little bill. We have everything covered, to 
cover employees, et cetera, et cetera. It is not something we 
just slap-dash put together. It is a well-thought-out bill.
    I think it is the right answer to a problem that this 
Nation has, when you take a look at the hundreds of thousands 
of people in D.C. who do not have representation in the halls 
of the U.S. House of Representatives and should. I do not 
disagree with that.
    Statehood is not the right way to do it. Retrocession is 
the right way to do it. I say, let us give it back to Maryland, 
with one little teeny area from the Capitol to the White House. 
I believe our numbers showed it was--we cannot find anybody 
that lives there for sure, but maybe two or three people at 
most would be disenfranchised, as opposed to the hundreds of 
thousands that are currently disenfranchised.
    I look forward to my colleagues' looking at the bill and 
letting me know if they would like to cosponsor it.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    Per the comment on the disconnect here, I think it is 
actually pretty straightforward. As my colleague, Mr. Griffith, 
said, article I of the United States Constitution: All 
legislative powers herein granted shall be vested to the 
Congress of the United States, which shall consist of the House 
and the Senate. Then, right there in Article VIII, ``to 
exercise legislation in all cases whatsoever'' over the 
District.
    Then, of course, the cleanup would be the 10th Amendment: 
``The powers not delegated to the United States by the 
Constitution are prohibited by it to the States,'' which, of 
course, would be the power designated by it under article I, 
section 8, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the 
people. Therefore, the other portions of this are properly 
vested.
    What we are doing is, I think, actually being pretty strict 
constructionists of the United States Constitution or a pretty 
clean read of why we are doing it.
    Why is it important, though? I would say, anybody, if you 
vote for this amendment, my reading is, you are supportive of 
allowing non-citizens to vote in the Nation's capital and, in 
particular, to allow a Russian embassy worker who is a Russian 
national, who has been in the District for 30 days, to not only 
be able to vote for Mayor next year in 2024, but, if you read 
who is qualified to be Mayor in Washington, D.C., it is anyone 
that is an eligible voter. If you take that a step further, 
which is legal under the current law if we do not change it, 
you could be a Russian national working at the Russian embassy, 
an adversary to the United States of America, you would not 
need a photo ID to vote, but you would be able to go down and 
vote for yourself for Mayor. Holy smokes. Time to clean this 
thing up.
    We can go in and look at how Washington, D.C., sent ballots 
out to their entire voter roll list in 2020 unsolicited and the 
disaster that that created. You can just simply talk to people 
in Washington, D.C., on how many homes had multiple live 
ballots mailed to them because the voter rolls are not properly 
maintained.
    We can go back and look when the D.C. audit occurred on the 
voter roll and they analyzed the number of people who had 
passed away and whether or not they had been correctly removed 
from the voter roll, and they failed their own audit.
    The problems with Washington, D.C.'s elections are well-
documented. The laws that have been passed as it relates to 
voting in the Nation's capital, I think, are actually pretty 
hard for people to fully appreciate how poorly they were 
drafted. The importance of this section is to get our Nation's 
capital back on track.
    I think it is pretty rational to say that we can have photo 
ID in our Nation's capital, to say that we are going to reserve 
voting in our Nation's capital for U.S. citizens, to make sure 
that we are protecting individuals' rights to vote right here 
in our Nation's capital.
    The Constitution, which I keep with me, makes it pretty 
clear how the statutory authority exists for us to do that, and 
the constitutional authority exists for us to do that, and why 
I am also, under the 10th Amendment, such a strong believer 
that the Federal Government should not have a Federal takeover 
of our elections, which would allow the States to control our 
elections.
    Where the ACE Act, I think, really hits the nail on the 
head is, it is giving the power and the tools to the States to 
be able to do their job to enhance voter integrity. As we saw 
on this Committee, all of those who went to Georgia on Monday 
saw was the empirical data of what happens when you put in 
place strong voter-integrity legislation. What happens is the 
exact opposite of the claims of the radical left, of Joe Biden 
calling it ``Jim Crow 2.0.'' What we saw was more people 
participating. You saw the Georgia survey show that people were 
happy with the results.
    The empirical data here is showing that the ACE Act is 
needed--is needed to provide tools to the States for them to be 
able to do their job, it is needed to protect our First 
Amendment rights, and it is needed to clean up the challenges 
that exist in our Nation's capital as a result for voting.
    I cannot fathom voting in support of this amendment. I 
would encourage a ``no'' vote.
    I will yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida maintain her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Seeing none, the question is on the 
amendment from--Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Yes.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Sewell this time. Thank you. From Ms. 
Sewell.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I would request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote has been requested. The 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Carey?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    Seeing none, the clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and seven noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    Mr. Loudermilk.
    [Presiding.] The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mrs. Torres of California--
--
    Mr. Loudermilk. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of 
a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mrs.----
    Mrs. Torres. Torres.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Yes, Torres. I was not sure who introduced 
it this time. Mrs. Torres is recognized for 5 minutes in 
support of the amendment.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, this is Election Security 101. 
If Republicans are serious about protecting the integrity of 
American elections, restricting access of foreign powers to 
non-public campaign material would have been at the very top of 
the list of priorities.
    This amendment defines non-public campaign materials as 
campaign material produced or paid for by a political candidate 
or a committee and not made available to the general public or 
otherwise in the public domain.
    I think ensuring foreign powers do not have access to 
material that has not been shared with the American people is 
common sense. We need to look no further than the 2016 
Presidential election to see the enormous and far-reaching 
consequences of foreign interference in our elections.
    The restriction proposed by the amendment is a necessary 
step in the honest fight to ensure the integrity of our 
elections.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman has yielded.
    Is there any further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Mr. Loudermilk. If not, the question is on the amendment by 
Mrs. Torres from California.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not adopted.
    Mr. Morelle. I would request a recorded vote, sir.
    Mr. Loudermilk. A roll call vote has been ordered, and the 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    The gentlewoman from California is recognized.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Will the clerk please distribute the 
amendment?
    Since the clerk has exceeded his step limit for today, the 
clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563, offered by Mrs. Torres of California. 
Insert at the appropriate----
    Mr. Loudermilk. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of 
a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mrs. Torres is now recognized for 5 minutes in support of 
her amendment.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, we need look no further than the 
2016 Presidential election to see the enormous and far-reaching 
consequences--sorry.
    I was reading the wrong one. Sorry.
    Mr. Chairman, this amendment bars those individuals who 
have been convicted of crimes related to the January 6th 
insurrection from entering the United States Capitol until the 
completion of their sentence.
    Mr. Chairman, on January 6, 2021, our democracy was under 
siege by a violent mob seeking to overturn the results of the 
2020 Presidential election. Many of us were here and witnessed 
how fragile our Republic is.
    Those responsible for the attack on the Capitol must be 
held accountable, and many of them have been. One week ago, we 
reached 30 months since the attack, and the----
    Mr. Griffith. Mr. Chairman?
    Mrs. Torres [continuing]. Department of Justice provided an 
update----
    Mr. Griffith. Mr. Chairman, the language I have in front of 
me does not match the lady's comments.
    Mrs. Torres. You are correct. I am reading the wrong one.
    Mr. Griffith. It happens.
    Mrs. Torres. It is so cold in here that my fingers have 
defrosted but my brain is still frozen.
    Mr. Chairman, if I may begin again?
    Mr. Loudermilk. You may. We will pause the time that you 
had. You may start again.
    Mrs. Torres. We need to look no further than the 2016 
Presidential election, Mr. Chairman, to see the enormous and 
far-reaching consequences of foreign interference in our 
election. The restriction proposed by the amendment is a 
necessary step in the honest fight to ensure the integrity of 
our elections.
    We know that disinformation campaigns by foreign powers 
often intentionally target communities of color. For example, 
NPR reported in October 2020 that Black and Latino voters were 
being flooded with disinformation in the final days before the 
election, in which the intent was unmistakable: to depress 
turnout among people of color by fueling distrust in the 
political process.
    Foreign disinformation campaigns and the implicit and 
sometimes explicit endorsement of such campaigns by any member 
of the Republican Party remain a key mechanism by which people 
of color continue to be cut out of the democratic process.
    States should be notified of such campaigns so they can 
inform their voters and take appropriate countermeasures. This 
benefits not only the States but our entire country by ensuring 
fair elections and that the results of which are reflective of 
the entire citizenry.
    I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman yields.
    Is there any further debate on this amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The question is on the amendment from Mrs. 
Torres from California.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. The 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I ask for a recorded vote.
    Mr. Loudermilk. A roll call vote is ordered, and the clerk 
will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there were four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Do any Members wish to seek recognition?
    The chair recognizes Mrs. Torres.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The clerk will please distribute the 
amendment.
    The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563----
    Mr. Loudermilk. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of 
a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.595

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.596

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mrs. Torres is now recognized for 5 minutes in support of 
the amendment.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, this amendment bars those 
individuals who have been convicted of crimes related to the 
January 6th insurrection from entering the U.S. Capitol until 
the completion of their sentence.
    Mr. Chairman, on January 6, 2021, our democracy was under 
siege by a violent mob seeking to overturn the results of the 
2020 Presidential election. Those responsible for the attack on 
the Capitol must be held accountable, and many of them have 
been.
    One week ago, we reached 30 months since the attack on the 
Department of Justice. The Department of Justice provided an 
update on its wide-ranging investigation and prosecutions.
    More than 1,000 defendants have been charged with crimes 
ranging from destruction of Government property, obstructing an 
official proceeding, assaulting an officer, including through 
the use of a deadly weapon, and even seditious conspiracy.
    Almost 600 individuals have pled guilty to Federal crimes 
committed on that day with more almost certainly to come.
    For crimes committed on January 6th, these individuals 
should not be permitted to enter the U.S.--the United States 
Capitol ever again, but at that very least, these individuals 
should be prohibited from entering the Capitol until they 
complete their sentence. I encourage my colleagues to support 
what should be a noncontroversial amendment.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman yields.
    The chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Griffith. I thank the gentleman for letting me speak to 
this. I just have several questions. The concept does make some 
sense, but I just quickly looked up the trespassing laws in 
D.C., and normally when one is in a situation that occurred 
like what occurred on January 6th, you are advised not to come 
back on the property. Thus, that would make it trespassing if 
they returned.
    I think the gentlelady inadvertently has reduced the amount 
of punishment that an individual could get for coming to the 
Capitol because, if they are trespassing, it is up to 6 months 
in jail, it is a misdemeanor, and up to a $1,000 fine, which is 
what she is proposing, is the $1,000 fine but is removing the 
``up to 6 months in jail.''
    I would think that the gentlelady would not intend to 
reduce the punishment and create confusion in the law and 
reduce the punishment for somebody returning to the Capitol who 
has previously been prohibited.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentleman yields.
    Is there any further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. I do, Mr. Chairman. I believe that this amendment 
is not germane to the subject matter of the bill.
    Mr. Loudermilk. I agree with the gentlewoman from Florida. 
I think it is pretty clear that this amendment, portions of it 
may be germane to this Committee, via the access to the 
Capitol.
    However, it is clearly not germane to the context of the 
bill, and the civil penalty aspect of it is also within the 
jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee. I rule that this 
amendment is not germane.
    Mr. Morelle. I appeal the ruling of the chair.
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I move to lay the appeal on the 
table.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The question is on the motion to table. The 
motion is not debatable.
    As many as are in favor of the motion to table, say aye. 
Aye.
    Those opposed, say no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The question is on the motion to the table. 
The clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes aye.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes aye.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes aye.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes no.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes no.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes no.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Torres votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. Yes.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are eight ayes 
and four noes.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The amendment is laid on the table.
    Do any Members wish to seek recognition?
    The gentlewoman from California, Mrs. Torres.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The clerk will please distribute the 
amendment.
    Mrs. Torres. This amendment pertains specifically to law 
enforcement.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The clerk will please report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 offered by Mrs. Torres of California. 
Insert after section 139 the following new section----
    Mr. Loudermilk. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of 
a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.597

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.598

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman from Florida reserves a 
point of order.
    Mrs. Torres is now recognized for 5 minutes in support of 
her amendment.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, this amendment bars those 
individuals who have been convicted of assaulting, resisting, 
or impeding a law enforcement officer during the January 6th 
insurrection from entering the U.S. Capitol until the 
completion of their sentence.
    Mr. Chairman, while I am disappointed by the outcome of the 
vote of my previous amendment, I hope that we can agree on a 
more narrow amendment applying only to those convicted of 
assaulting a law enforcement officer.
    This is not an exercise. Just last week the Department of 
Justice reported that approximately 110 defendants have been 
charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing 
serious bodily injury to an officer during the insurrection of 
January 6th.
    A total of 68 of those who have pleaded guilty to felonies 
have pleaded to Federal charges of assaulting a law enforcement 
officer.
    Again, my amendment only applies to those individuals who 
have been convicted of the crime of assaulting a law 
enforcement officer, and the ban on entering the Capitol only 
applies until the completion of their sentence.
    In recognition of the brave officers who fought to defend 
the Capitol and many of us on January 6th, I encourage all of 
my colleagues to support this amendment.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The gentlewoman yields.
    Is there further debate on this amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida insist on her point of 
order?
    Ms. Lee. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I do. This amendment is not 
germane to the underlying bill.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The chair agrees that this, again, is--
portions of it may be germane to the jurisdiction of this 
Committee. However, it is not germane to the subject matter of 
the bill, and, therefore, I agree that it is not germane.
    Mr. Morelle. I will appeal the ruling of the chair.
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chair, I move to lay the appeal on the table.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The question is on the motion to table. The 
motion is not debatable.
    As many as are in favor of the motion to table, please say 
aye.
    Those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Mr. Loudermilk. The question is on the motion to table. The 
clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes aye.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes aye.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes aye.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes no.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes no.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes no.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Torres votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil.
    [Presiding.] Does any Member wish to change their vote.
    The clerk will report.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are seven ayes 
and four noes.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mrs. Torres.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R. 4563 offered by Mrs. Torres of California--
--
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of 
a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.599

    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlelady reserves a point of order.
    Mrs. Torres is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, the rights protected by the 
First Amendment are at the core of who we are as Americans--
freedom of religion, freedom of the press, our right to protest 
and to petition our Government. All of these are foundational 
to who we are as people.
    The freedom of speech similarly is critically important. 
The Supreme Court has made it clear that First Amendment 
protections do not allow for rhetoric that is so malicious that 
it causes violence and harm.
    This is clear. The First Amendment does not protect against 
criminal liability or incitement to violence, and as we saw 
with former President Trump's rhetoric on January 6th, 2021, is 
words, specially from those in positions of power, have 
meaning.
    They also have consequences.
    I urge my colleagues to support this amendment that would 
clarify this important part of the First Amendment case law, 
and I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I think we are entering silly land late in the evening. I 
will be voting against this amendment.
    I yield back.
    Any further debate on the amendment?
    Seeing none, all those in favor, signify by saying--oh, 
apologize.
    Does the gentlewoman from Florida--I forgot about the point 
of order that was being held. Does the gentlewoman from Florida 
insist on her point of order?
    Ms. Lee. No, Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Mrs. Torres.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no. No.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote has been ordered. The 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer? Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Torres votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.600

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.601

    Chairman Steil. For what purpose does the gentlewoman from 
Florida seek recognition--Oklahoma seek recognition?
    Mrs. Bice. I seek a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is now recognizes for 5 minutes in support of 
the bill.
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is pretty 
straightforward. It clarifies Congress' authority under article 
I, section 4, clause of the United States Constitution, often 
referred to as the Elections Clause, relying on the plain 
language of Supreme Court decisions, including those authored 
by Justice Antonin Scalia.
    I just note that the Constitution, which we have read 
sections here this evening--and I will read a section, article 
I, section 4: The times, places, and manner of holding 
elections for Senators and Representatives shall be prescribed 
in each State by the legislature thereof. The Congress may, at 
any time, by law, make or alter such regulations.
    Having served in the New York State legislature for 20 
years, I do not know that anyone has higher regard for State 
government and the workings of it. The last 6 years that I 
served in the New York State Assembly, I served as the majority 
leader, and I have enormous respect for legislatures, all 50 of 
them, around this country.
    There is something about reading sentences that I learned--
I did not go to a fancy Ivy league college. I went to a little 
State college in New York and--but nonetheless reading in plain 
language, the Congress may, at any time, by law, make or alter 
such regulations.
    When is Congress barred from making such laws or 
regulations? At no time. It is not just Joe Morelle and his 
undergraduate degree that can read that. Justice Scalia is a 
lion in conservative legal circles. Before becoming a judge, he 
worked at the law firm Jones Day and worked in several 
different positions in several Republican Presidential 
administrations.
    He was appointed by President Ford to the District of 
Columbia Circuit Court and appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court 
by President Ronald Reagan.
    Writing for the majority in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council 
of Arizona, Justice Scalia made it expressly clear that the 
Elections Clause's substantive scope is broad. Times, places, 
and manner, the Court has written, are comprehensive words 
which embrace authority to provide a complete code for 
congressional elections.
    In practice, the clause functions as a default provision. 
It invests the States with responsibility for the mechanics of 
congressional elections but only so far as Congress declines to 
preempt State legislative choices.
    That is Justice Scalia writing, not me. Indeed, he 
emphasized that the power of Congress over the times, places, 
and manner of congressional elections is, quote, paramount, and 
may be exercised at any time and to any extent which it deems 
expedient. Far as it is exercised and no farther, the 
regulations affected supersede those of the State which are 
inconsistent therewith.
    The amendment would simply ensure that Justice Scalia's 
views are properly included in this bill to make sure that we 
do not read just part of that sentence of the Constitution but 
the entire sentence and want to make sure that that is clear 
and that people acknowledge it.
    I think this amendment, which is, on its face, factual and 
true, is properly included, and I encourage all Members to vote 
for this amendment.
    With that, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Mrs. Bice is recognized for 5 minutes to strike the last 
word.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to say that, 
while I recognize and appreciate my colleague from New York, I 
would say that, in Oklahoma, the election system that we have 
in place, I believe, is one of, if not the best in the entire 
country.
    I say that because I know what the outcome of our elections 
are on election night, unlike some of our congressional seats, 
especially those in New York, which we did not know for not 
just weeks but months in some cases.
    I believe that it is, as you mentioned, the purview of the 
States to be able to decide the time, place, and manner by 
which these elections are to be held, and the ACE Act actually 
does that. It reduces Federal interference by prohibiting 
Federal funds from being used for congressional campaigns.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Sewell is recognized----
    Ms. Sewell. I would like to strike the last word.
    Chairman Steil [continuing]. to strike the last word.
    Ms. Sewell. You know, I agree with our Ranking Member on 
this amendment. You know, we need to look no further than what 
happened to State legislatures across this country after the 
Shelby v. Holder decision.
    We saw not just deep red States; we saw States like North 
Dakota implement a law that seemingly, on its face, was not 
suppressive. That law was to require, for voter registration, 
physical addresses.
    What made it suppressive was the fact that Tribal lands 
have post office boxes, not physical addresses, therefore, 
suppressing and restricting the ability of those in Indian 
Country to vote.
    I think that what Scalia said, that, while States do have 
the right to determine time, manner, and place, we have to have 
Federal oversight when there is overreach by State 
legislatures.
    This is a common-sense amendment that needs to be 
clarified, I believe, and this amendment would do such, and so 
I support this amendment and ask my colleagues to also 
acknowledge that Federal oversight is needed when States go 
awry and go amok.
    Right now, we do not have any ability to stop State 
legislatures from imposing laws that may, on its face, seem 
benign but, in effect, are voter suppression laws.
    That, in and of itself, is why I had hoped that being on 
this Committee, we could work in a bipartisan manner to figure 
out a way that we can put back Federal oversight when States go 
amok.
    With that, I ask my colleagues to vote in favor of this 
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate to the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman insist on her point of order?
    Mrs. Bice. I withdraw my point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The point of order is withdrawn.
    The vote is on the amendment from Mr. Morelle.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no. No.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. The 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I request a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested. The 
clerk will please call the role.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Torres votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally?
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Do any Members seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the amendment in the nature of----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.602

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.603

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.604

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.605

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.606

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.607

    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chair?
    Chairman Steil. Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Mrs. Bice reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The amendment creates 
a commission to study the disparity in turnout and voting 
experience between Black and White voters in elections for 
public offices.
    I want to say before I describe in any real even cursory 
way what the commission will consist of, I do not think there 
is an issue more important as a voting rights issue to study 
than the disparity between Black and White voters. This was 
borne out significantly.
    We all have different opinions on many things, but I think 
it is important to note--and we heard this many times during 
the hearing as these statistics were noted--that there remains 
a pretty significant disparity in Black and White voting.
    In our quest--and I think this is shared by all of us here, 
without regard to party--we would want every American to 
participate and to make use of the franchise.
    Until you have full access to the ballot, every single 
right that we possess is in question and in danger. That is the 
most fundamental of all freedoms, so--and it seems to me, as we 
continue to look at trying to improve the way that Americans 
vote and to make it easier to access the ballot, that that 
ongoing disparity, which is borne out in virtually every State 
and local elections that disparity exists.
    This commission, which I envision would have 12 Members 
appointed by Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate 
leadership, chairs and Ranking Members of both Committee on 
House Administration and the Senate Committee on Rules and 
Administration, to study and better understand the full breadth 
of the disparity, which will allow us to continue to develop 
targeted measures to address it.
    The commission will have the ability to hold hearings and 
collect official data to do just that and would help to better 
inform both Houses of Congress on ways that we can close that 
gap.
    I have mentioned many times, I am incredibly proud of the 
fact that Frederick Douglass, who published ``The North Star,'' 
a copy of which hangs on my office wall in the Capitol, that he 
printed that newspaper, and is buried in Rochester, New York, 
where he lived and did some of his greatest work.
    I am proud that Frederick Douglass is a Rochesterian, as I 
am proud that Susan B. Anthony is a Rochesterian.
    I would like to have such a commission bear his name, and 
it would be called the Frederick Douglass Commission to help 
continue his legacy of walking the long but always righteous 
path toward real full enfranchisement for all Americans, and I 
would strongly urge passage of this amendment by all my 
colleagues.
    With that, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I will recognize myself for 5 minutes for the purpose of 
striking the last word.
    One, I am excited to know that you have a Republican 
hanging in your office.
    Mr. Morelle. It is true.
    Chairman Steil. That is good. It is good to know.
    Mr. Morelle. Well, he is not hanging. His newspaper is.
    Chairman Steil. Well--the newspaper written by a Republican 
is hanging in your office. It is getting late, and we are on 
dangerous turf----
    Mr. Morelle. Yes, we are.
    Chairman Steil [continuing]. as we even discuss some of 
these things.
    I actually think the analysis that we are trying to do, 
that you bring up, I actually think it is really important, and 
I would love to dive further into this as we go forward, 
because I would--we were in Georgia on Monday. We talked a lot 
about the University of Georgia survey that showed following 
Georgia passing voter integrity laws, what happened was higher 
participation.
    We actually, if you look at the University of Georgia 
study, which has been inserted into the record, which maybe 
would be useful to this type of a research project, is that 
Blacks, in particular, had a good voting experience, and 
statistically zero percent had a poor voting experience.
    That is positive. It would be agreed to continue to build 
on that and look at the Georgia law as maybe a framework that 
other States would want to use to improve the voting experience 
for people all across the demographic spectrums: Black, White, 
Asian, Hispanic, veterans, women, men, the whole bucket.
    I am supportive of the broader objectives. I think there is 
some really good empirical data showing, when good election 
integrity bills move forward, that people have a better voting 
experience. I think after the passage of the ACE Act, more and 
more Americans would have a positive voting experience as well.
    I do not know that this is the approach that we would want 
to take. It would be something I would be happy to have a 
conversation with. I will not be supporting this amendment in 
the ACE Act, but I do think a lot of empirical data shows, as 
it did in Georgia following the University of Georgia survey, 
that legislation like this, like the ACE Act, the underlying 
text, will actually really improve people's voting experience 
and so exciting to know maybe there is something we could find 
in there to work on.
    I will not be supporting this particular commission but 
happy to work on that with you.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Sewell. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes to 
strike the last word.
    Ms. Sewell. I would like to strike the last word. Thank 
you, Mr. Chairman.
    You know, I just wanted to, with all due respect, correct 
the record. I think that the reason why we had higher voter 
participation in Georgia was not because of the reforms of 202 
but rather in spite of reforms of 202.
    African-American voters, voters of color, stood in long 
lines for hours on end, obviously not being able to even get a 
drink of water or a piece of bread. They did so because they 
knew of the importance of their vote and how--what was at stake 
in their vote.
    That Georgia study has been cited a couple of times by 
yourself and others, and that was a study of 1,200 voters, and 
they were voters that were voting through absentee and through 
early voting.
    The point I am trying to make is the sample size was in no 
way comparative to the hundreds of thousands of people, of 
African Americans that live in Fulton County and Dekalb County 
and other counties in Georgia.
    I just think--I think that that--that it is misleading to 
use that as an example of why, you know, S.B. 202 reform was, 
you know, was effective--or I cannot remember exactly--but the 
reality is that I support Ranking Member Morelle on setting up 
such a commission and naming it after Frederick Douglass.
    You know, I hail from Selma, Alabama, arguably the 
birthplace of voting rights, where John Lewis and others shed 
blood on a bridge for the equal right of all Americans to vote.
    The fact of the matter is that that was 58 years ago--58 
years ago--and yet even today there are major disparities 
between African-American voters and White voters.
    I think that if we are really to get to the bottom of that, 
we do need to do--you know, commission a study. I think a 
commission like this in the name of Frederick Douglass would be 
appropriate, and I hope that my colleagues would vote in favor 
of such an opportunity.
    Thanks and I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate?
    Mr. Griffith is recognized for 5 minutes to strike the last 
word.
    Mr. Griffith. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I would look forward 
to working with my colleagues on the other side on the 
standalone bill, to do something. I think it is great to name 
it for Frederick Douglass.
    We need to look at disparity across the board. When the 
Democrat-controlled legislature and State government in 
Virginia at the turn--from the 1800's to the 1900's, the 
beginning of the 20th century, created a new constitution, it 
was specifically designed and by statement, they said it was 
designed to keep Black voters and rural White Republicans, 
particularly in the Appalachian region of Virginia, from voting 
because we had the Mountain Valley Republicans.
    In fact, four of the counties that I currently represent 
out of the 28 jurisdictions were pro-union during the Civil 
War, and they wanted to exclude all of them.
    We still have lower voter representation. Although not a 
minority vote, it is a predominantly rural White district, but 
we still have lower participation, particularly in the 
Appalachian region, than we do in other parts of Virginia.
    I would hope that, as we move forward working on something 
like this, I think, it is appropriate that we look at all 
disparities and, wherever you see lower voter turnout, that we 
work to see how we can increase that.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman insist on her point of order?
    Mrs. Bice. I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The question is on the amendment from Mr. 
Morelle.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. The 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. Can I have the recorded vote, please?
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested. The 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer? Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Torres votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition.
    Mrs. Torres.
    Mrs. Torres. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Mrs. Torres's amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of 
a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.608

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.609

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.610

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.611

    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Steil. Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Mrs. Bice reserves a point of order.
    Mrs. Torres is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
bill.
    Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We saw voters wait in 
line for hours during the 2020 election. In Georgia, for 
example, some voters waited more than 10 hours to cast their 
ballot.
    The State of Georgia goes so far as to impose criminal 
penalties for persons who give or offer food or water to a 
voter within 150 feet of the outer edge of a polling place or 
within 25 feet of any voter standing in line to vote, 
regardless of the length of time that they spent on their feet 
waiting to cast their ballot.
    The notion that voters who send us to Congress should not 
have the same rights as any other person to have a break and to 
be able to eat something is shamelessly anti-democratic.
    My Republican colleagues know full well that if voters in 
under-served communities have to wait in line for 10 hours 
without food or water or anyone to take care of their kids, a 
lot of them just are not going to vote.
    This provision is just the latest attempt to govern based 
on a big lie and restrict the sacred right to vote. My 
amendment fixes that, and I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment, and I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlelady yields back.
    Is there further debate?
    Mr. Loudermilk is recognized to strike the last word.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I just want to make sure everyone understands because there 
has been a lot of information about this and pointing fingers 
at Georgia.
    First of all, because of Senate Bill 202 pretty much the 
longest lines that people waited in, in this last election was 
about 30 minutes, which is much lower than it had been in the 
past.
    Second of all, the restrictions that were put in were not 
that individuals in line could not receive food or water. The 
issue was, campaigns were actually handing out water, sometimes 
with a label of a candidate on the water, or they were 
obviously campaigning by handing out the food and the beverages 
to people there in line which was in violation of Georgia 
election law.
    What the law clarified is that the municipality, the county 
government, the--any entity of government can provide 
refreshments and beverages to those who are in line but to 
ensure that the people who are voting are not--not giving 
something in a campaign manner by a campaign.
    Just wanted to make sure that that was clear. There is not 
a prohibition on food and water in Georgia. We are not trying 
to starve or thirst anyone or make someone want to leave the 
line. No, it was just to enforce, further provide enforcement 
of election law in Georgia.
    Second of all, if you do something like we have in the ACE 
Act here in a State, you will not have to worry about it 
because the lines will not be as long.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Mr. Morelle. I would like to have time if I might, Mr. 
Chair.
    Chairman Steil. Yes. The Ranking Member is recognized to 
strike the last word.
    Mr. Morelle. I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. I strongly 
support the amendment, and I would like to yield, for purposes 
of additional conversation, to Mrs. Torres.
    Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Mr. Morelle, for that. You know, 
Georgians do not experience long lines evenly. In Federal 
general elections from 2014 to 2020, Black voters generally 
experience longer wait times often with substantial 
disparities.
    During the 2022 election, the racial gap in wait times was 
the largest of the last three midterm election cycles.
    I understand that we do not want any politicking around the 
polling locations. However, the State of Georgia, they are not 
stepping up and providing the food and water for the people. 
They cannot even provide a ballot in time for people to vote. 
How are they going to provide water and food for those having 
to wait 10 hours?
    It is obvious that they do not care about the Black voters. 
They do not care because it is the Black voters that are 
waiting 10 hours in line. If they cared anything about those 
Black voters, they would have purchased those bottles of water 
so that nonprofit organizations or political organizations do 
not have to provide that.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. Mr. Morelle, do you yield back?
    Mr. Morelle. I am sorry. Yes, I do, sir.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Does anyone seek recognition to speak on the amendment?
    I recognize myself for the purpose of striking the last 
word. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Again, here we are, misinformation that is coming forth. 
First of all, as I brought up Senate Bill 202 reduced the 
problems within the lines. I do agree with my colleague from 
California; yes, there were long lines in Fulton County, 
Georgia. The Democrat-controlled areas of Georgia are the ones 
that we had the biggest problems, the longest lines.
    I remember that distinctly because, during the primaries of 
2020, I received a call from a news agency wanting to talk to 
me, because I was on this Committee, about the long, long lines 
that existed in Fulton County, which was predominantly 
controlled by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
    Senate Bill 202 in Georgia came forward to actually cleanup 
the mess that Democrats in those counties had created, and, 
therefore, it is up to the county of Fulton County, which is 
still Democrat-controlled, whether they want to provide water 
or not.
    Obviously, if they are not providing it, it must be 
because, you know, the average wait time in most of these areas 
are now 30 minutes or less.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield my time back to you.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    I appreciate your comments. There is a lot of 
misinformation on this. It is one of the reasons Joe Biden got 
four Pinocchios from The Washington Post. It is one of the 
reasons we have had to work so hard to clarify the lies that 
have been told about S.B. 202.
    When we look at the empirical data, it does not match up 
with the rhetoric that was in front of it. It is also 
incredibly misleading for a lot of folks who have continued to 
say ``you cannot have water, you cannot eat,'' where the 
underlying bill in Georgia specifically addresses campaigns.
    It is an electioneering issue, as determined by those 
people in the State of Georgia, and it does not restrict 
municipalities. It does not restrict charities. What it does 
is, it restricts election campaigns, which is in the purview of 
the State of Georgia to do that.
    Again, if we go back and look at what was the experience of 
the people voting in the State of Georgia, the University of 
Georgia survey shows that people overwhelmingly have had a 
positive experience, and, in particular, zero percent of Blacks 
had a poor experience, which means we should look at what went 
right and build on it.
    I do not think we need a Federal mandate as suggested in 
that amendment. I will be voting no.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment.
    Seeing none, I do not believe there was a point of order 
reserved on this previously. Did you reserve? You yield it back 
either way.
    Mrs. Bice. I believe I did, and I withdraw if I did not--or 
if I did.
    Chairman Steil. All right. We will test our memories.
    Without objection the question then is on the underlying 
amendment from Mrs. Torres.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, nay.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, and the 
agreement is not agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested. The 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member seek to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are 3 ayes and 
7 noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition.
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. May I, Mr. Chair, while they are distributing, 
I do want to offer my thanks to you and to the members of the 
majority. While this is certainly a challenging issue on which 
we have, I think, probably stark differences in how we view 
this, I appreciate the civility. I appreciate the willingness 
of all sides to hear the debate.
    Just for purposes of giving you some direction about what 
we would like to do, we have probably about a dozen more 
amendments. I am hoping to move them quickly. I know we are due 
back on the floor by 10.
    Hopefully, within 20 minutes or so, we can dispense, at 
least, of our amendments. Just to, I think rather than 
belaboring it much longer--I think we could go much longer, but 
frankly I am too cold to even barely talk, so----
    Chairman Steil. Turn the heat down?
    Mr. Morelle. I really do appreciate the conversation 
tonight, and so I wanted to thank you and thank the Members.
    Chairman Steil. Thank you very much.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute to H.R.----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.612

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.613

    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Oklahoma?
    Mrs. Bice. I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Oklahoma reserves a 
point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.
    In 2022, a Federal court in Arizona barred armed vigilantes 
from openly carrying firearms or wearing body armor within 250 
yards of a ballot dropbox after those vigilantes engaged in a 
coordinated voter intimidation scheme.
    It is important, I think, to understand that people are 
intimidated, that poll workers have faced threats, and many, 
many fear for their personal safety.
    It seems to me a reasonable idea to take the court order 
and think about ways that we can ensure a lack of--or making 
sure that there is no intimidation of poll workers, nor any 
intimidation of voters.
    This amendment would ban the presence of firearms within 
250 yards of any polling place and ensure those voters' safety, 
as well as poll workers, and so I would like to advance the 
amendment.
    It does include the same exception for law enforcement 
officers so that clearly people who are in law enforcement 
engaged in their official duties would be exempt from this, and 
I would encourage my colleagues to support the amendment.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Mr. Griffith is recognized.
    Mr. Griffith. Mr. Chairman, I am just taking a look at the 
language, and it looks like to me, the exception for law 
enforcement officers has an ``and,'' not an ``or.'' A law 
enforcement officer who gets off from work and goes to the 
polling place, if he is not there in his capacity as a law 
enforcement officer and he has a gun, this would make him in 
violation of that law and subject to a civil penalty, if I read 
it correctly.
    I could be wrong, but I just think we are going to end up 
with people being charged who are just coming to the polls 
innocently. A lot of folks in my district, you know, carry a 
weapon in their vehicle. Many of them carry it on their bodies 
at all times. They are licensed by the State of Virginia to do 
that. I just think we are going a little too far with this.
    I do notice that ``and,'' and it looks like to me that a 
law enforcement officer who gets off duty and is not there in 
his capacity as a law enforcement officer would be in violation 
as written.
    Mr. Morelle. Well, I would offer if I may----
    Chairman Steil. Does the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Morelle. I am sorry.
    Mr. Griffith. Yes, I had yielded back, or I can yield to 
the individual, either one.
    Mr. Morelle. Just to say that I am perfectly happy to make 
a clarifying amendment if that would gain the gentle person's 
support.
    Mr. Griffith. It would not, but I appreciate the offer.
    Mr. Morelle. Well, you cannot say I did not offer. I--thank 
you, sir.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields.
    Further debate?
    Mr. Loudermilk.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will be brief.
    Yes, I also have concerns with this amendment because it 
would circumvent a lot of State laws. In the State of Georgia, 
there are people that are recognized by law enforcement with 
the ability to carry weapons into the same areas that law 
enforcement are as well. There is special security officers 
that are private or private investigators or executive 
protection officials.
    The State of Georgia has actually granted them the ability 
to carry a firearm, including judges as well. Judges are 
allowed to carry firearms at any place that a commissioned law 
enforcement officer is allowed to carry.
    This would circumvent a lot of State laws, and I have 
jurisdictional--or germaneness concerns about this as well, but 
I do object to this bill--this amendment.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Seeing none, does the woman insist--does the gentlewoman 
from Oklahoma insist on her point of order?
    Mrs. Bice. I do, Mr. Chairman. This is not germane, due to 
it being within the jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee. 
The Second Amendment protects firearm ownership and falls 
within the Judiciary's jurisdiction as a civil liberties issue.
    Chairman Steil. The chair agrees. The amendment is not 
germane.
    Mr. Morelle. I would appeal the ruling of the chair.
    Mrs. Bice. I move to lay the appeal on the table, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. The question is on the motion to table. The 
motion is not debatable.
    As many as are in favor of the motion to table, say aye.
    Those opposed, say no. No.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, I move to lay the appeal on the 
table.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member----
    Mr. Morelle. I ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested. The 
clerk will call the role.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye.
    Mr. Griffith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes aye.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes aye.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes aye.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes no.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes no.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes no.
    Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are eight ayes 
and three noes.
    Chairman Steil. The motion is tabled. The amendment is 
dispensed with.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment will be distributed.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the amendment----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, further reading of the 
amendment will be dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.614

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.615

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.616

    Chairman Steil. Mrs. Bice.
    Mrs. Bice. I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Mrs. Bice reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thousands of children of Active Duty servicemembers of our 
Armed Forces are educated at Department of Defense education 
activity schools on military bases, both at home and around the 
globe, students ranging from kindergarten to high school, who 
must often up-end their lives as their parents are deployed to 
defend us around the world.
    In honor of those sacrifices, this amendment provides that 
children of American members of the Armed Services make--when 
they graduate from high school, would receive a flag flown over 
the United States Capitol, as well as a voter registration form 
so that every graduating senior at every DOD education activity 
would not only receive as a gift for their service but also get 
the opportunity to get the forms necessary to register to vote.
    It is essential we recognize and respect children of our 
servicemembers, ensure they are able to make their voices heard 
in our democratic process. I encourage my colleagues to support 
the amendment.
    With that, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on this amendment?
    I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I appreciate the amendment by my colleague. It is something 
I think we should work toward. I would love to consider this as 
a standalone bill. I do not think this is a--the idea is wrong. 
I would love to work on the nuance with you. Maybe there would 
be an opportunity.
    I think at this time I am not ready to support this text 
but do find the idea interesting and support your interest in 
the topic.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Seeing none, does the gentlewoman from Oklahoma reserve her 
point of order?
    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Being the question is on the amendment from 
Mr. Morelle, all those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote has been ordered. The 
clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Torres votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are three ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek to be recognized?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the amendment----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment has been dispensed.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.617

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.618

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.619

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.620

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.621

    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Mrs. Bice reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I know that during our many conversations, the hearings on 
the challenges that election officials at the county level 
across the country face in terms of the shortage of poll 
workers, that that shortage can cause long lines for voters 
certainly on election day but can cause many challenges for 
election officials who are trying to dispense with their duties 
and make sure that every American has an opportunity to vote.
    In this amendment, I think, is a novel idea to try to 
address that worker shortage by encouraging, through a HAVA 
grant, a program that would encourage Wounded Warriors and 
military veterans to become poll workers.
    The program would recognize that these individuals have 
served our country and many would like to continue to make 
contributions to American democracy.
    This is a way to support our troops when they come home and 
veterans who struggle to make their ends meet when they come 
home from service. I would urge the adoption of this amendment 
to create the HAVA grant program and to pass this amendment.
    With that, I yield.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate on this amendment?
    Ms. Lee.
    Ms. Lee. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I would just note that I 
believe the subject of poll worker recruiting and training is 
within the realm of things that are dedicated to our States who 
have the primary responsibility for administering our 
elections.
    For that reason, I would not support this amendment and 
would leave to our State and local election officials the task 
of identifying poll workers for their respective jurisdictions.
    With that, I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further debate on this amendment?
    Does the gentlewoman from Oklahoma reserve a point of 
order?
    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The question is now on the amendment from 
the gentleman from New York.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, say no.
    In the opinion of the chair, since I did not even hear any 
ayes, the noes have it. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A roll call vote has been requested.
    Mrs. Bice.
    [Inaudible.]
    Chairman Steil. Well, my ears could be deceiving me in 
these late hours, Mrs. Bice, but I did not hear it.
    A roll call vote has been ordered. The clerk will please 
call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice--excuse me. Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are three ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not adopted.
    Do any Members seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment. 
The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.622

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.623

    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Oklahoma reserves a 
point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    One of the common refrains we hear is that we need to 
continue to support our troops and honor those who have 
sacrificed for this amazing democracy. This amendment does just 
that.
    We should not forget the many sacrifices that relatives of 
military personnel make for support of those individuals who 
are our war fighters to ensure they can participate in the 
democracy that they love, that their loved ones are fighting 
for.
    Family members should not be penalized for their loved 
ones' service or absence while serving. Not extending the 
guarantee of residency to family of military personnel would do 
just that.
    This amendment would guarantee the right to participate in 
elections and make sure that they continue to have their 
permanent residency while they have family members who are 
Active Duty and are serving.
    This certainly does fall under our purview, because it 
deals with military veterans--or military personnel--and I 
would like to urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further debate?
    The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Mr. Loudermilk is recognized.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I appreciate the intent of the amendment. However, this is 
clearly within the States' purview and it is a States issue, 
and I will oppose it.
    I yield back.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Seeing none, the question--does the gentlewoman----
    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The question is now on the amendment from 
the gentleman from New York.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, say no.
    I think I only heard noes. The noes had it again.
    Mr. Morelle. I would ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested.
    The clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Mr. Steil. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes no.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes no.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes no.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. No.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes no.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. Mrs. Bice votes no.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes no.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes no.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes no.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes aye.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes aye.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes aye.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes aye.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote there are four ayes 
and eight noes.
    Chairman Steil. The amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Lee.
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee report 
H.R. 4563 favorably to the House, as amended, with the 
recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do 
pass.
    Chairman Steil. The question as presented is not in order, 
because the initial question would need to be on the Amendment 
in the Nature of a Substitute.
    Give me one moment.
    [Pause.]
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I will withdraw my motion.
    Chairman Steil. OK. We are going to--we have a friendly 
adjustment to the gentlewoman from Florida and our colleagues. 
We are going to--we are going to--there are a few more 
amendments we are going to do in short order and then quickly 
move on to final consideration of the Amendment in the Nature 
of a Substitute and then the underlying bill, which should give 
us a brief break prior to a long floor series tonight.
    We are going to pause here in place for just a moment.
    [Pause.]
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Steil. The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.624

    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman from Oklahoma reserves a 
point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I note that the bill in question prohibits third-party 
funding for the administration of our elections. I note that 
during the 2020 election third-party funding was used for, 
among other things, purchasing PPE during a global pandemic.
    An essential part of our elections administration is a 
post-election work, including audits. To ensure consistency 
with the bill that you have advanced, this amendment would 
include a prohibition on third-party funding for conducting 
post-election audits of the results of an election or the 
examination of the voting and nonvoting equipment used in the 
administration of the election.
    If we are going to prohibit third-party and individual 
contributions to the work of county boards of elections across 
the country prior to the election, it seems to me fairness 
dictates that we stop those third parties also from 
contributing and participating in post-election activities as 
well.
    Common-sense amendment. I think it makes it consistent with 
the provisions of the bill that the Republican side has 
advanced. I would urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
    Chairman Steil. Is there further--the gentleman yields 
back?
    Mr. Morelle. Yes, sir.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I appreciate the gentleman's amendment. I think that the 
distinction here is the concern is the conduct of the election 
itself.
    As my friend from Florida often reminds us all, elections 
are inherently partisan. The operations of the election should 
be nonpartisan. This gets into a discussion of how you do the 
review and analysis after the fact, not the conduct and 
analysis of the election.
    I appreciate the general idea, but I think at this time I 
will be voting no. Happy to explore this concept further, as it 
was just presented moments ago.
    I yield back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Ms. Sewell.
    Ms. Sewell. I move to strike the last word.
    Chairman Steil. Ms. Sewell is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. I would like to yield to Ranking Member 
Morelle.
    Mr. Morelle. Not to put too fine a point on this, but 
while, yes, the lead-up in elections may be and are by nature 
partisan, the counting of votes and the auditing and making 
sure the equipment functions, all that can be viewed from a 
partisan lens as well.
    Simply ensuring that if we are going to take the position 
and we are going to establish as a principle not allowing third 
parties to participate in the preparation of election materials 
or helping poll workers with equipment that might be provided 
during a global pandemic, then it seems to me that principle 
should apply post-election as well.
    I think this is entirely fair. It is aboveboard. What is 
good prior to an election should also hold and should be good 
post-election.
    I will yield back. Thank you, Ms. Sewell.
    Chairman Steil. Will the gentleman--Ms. Sewell, will you 
yield to me for 30 seconds?
    Ms. Sewell. I yield to the Chairman.
    Chairman Steil. Just to the Ranking Member, I think 
actually it is a novel approach. I just have not had more than 
a few minutes to review it. It is something I would be more 
than willing to consider and work with you as a standalone 
piece of legislation.
    I do not know that it is required inside the ACE Act or the 
work that we are doing here, but something I would be open to 
further explore with you.
    I yield back to you, Ms. Sewell.
    Ms. Sewell. I yield the remainder of my time back to you.
    Chairman Steil. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Is there further discussion of the amendment?
    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my point of order.
    Chairman Steil. If not, the question is on the amendment 
from Mr. Morelle.
    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any Member seek recognition?
    Mr. Morelle. Mr. Chairman, I have one final amendment at 
the desk.
    Chairman Steil. Amen. Hallelujah.
    The clerk will distribute the amendment.
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute----
    Chairman Steil. Without objection, the reading of the 
amendment is dispensed with.
    [Ranking Member Morelle's amendment to the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 4563 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.625

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T6507.626

    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Steil. Mrs. Bice reserves a point of order.
    Mr. Morelle is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the 
amendment.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This amendment would add to the findings section of the 
bill that, contrary to the illegal and corrupt efforts 
undertaken by former President Trump after the 2020 
Presidential election, States are not permitted to submit false 
slates of electors in an effort to overturn the will of the 
people.
    It has been the hallmark of American democracy, the 
peaceful transfer of power, which first began with the election 
where Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams in the election of 
1800, if my memory serves--or if my memory of history serves.
    In that time forward, we have always had a peaceful 
transfer of power. People who lose acknowledge they lose. 
Winners go on.
    After the 2020 election, then President Trump and his team 
planned, directed, and coordinated a scheme to create false 
electoral slates and transmit those slates to Congress and the 
National Archives. This was a critical element of a scheme to 
use the Justice Department to try and overturn the election. It 
is the first time in American history that happened.
    I think it is important for us as we are considering a 
significant change in election law to remember that, to make 
sure that it is part of the findings section of this bill.
    The Trump team has publicly suggested these alternative 
slates were to preserve his options if the courts vindicated 
their baseless legal challenges, and in private they pursued 
the false alternative slates in an attempt to pressure the Vice 
President to overturn the election, which, to the Vice 
President's credit, he ultimately made the decision that he 
would not go along with the attempts by the former President.
    These efforts clearly are outrageous. I think the American 
people have every reason to be incredibly troubled by them. 
They have worked at undermining the confidence of Americans in 
our elections along with the entire democratic system.
    I believe firmly, and I think many people would agree, that 
if we do not have the right to vote--if Americans cannot be 
persuaded that when their vote is cast it is counted and that 
the winners win and the losers come back potentially in future 
elections.
    You know, I learned a lot of lessons as a kid, most of them 
on a ball field. My father would say, you know, if you win, do 
not gloat. You win and you do it respectfully. If you lose, you 
accept that.
    That has been the hallmark, as I said, of American 
democracy and the peaceful transfer of power. For the first 
time in nearly 250 years, that was challenged dramatically in 
2020.
    This amendment should be in the findings. I think we should 
all stand together to make sure that anyone who attempts this 
will face not only the consequence of that, but that Congress 
will stand up and make known our strong opposition to anything 
that impairs the right of the peaceful transfer of power.
    With that, I urge adoption of the amendment and yield my 
time.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Mr. Griffith is recognized for 5 minutes to strike the last 
word.
    Mr. Griffith. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
    This amendment creates some interesting issues. The first 
one that jumps out is: Who decides? How do you know what is a 
false slate of electors?
    I started off earlier this evening, when I first was able 
to get here from my other markup, talking about the Tilden-
Hayes affair, where the Samuel J. Tilden and Rutherford B. 
Hayes election in 1876 was called into question.
    There were two States where there were two sets of electors 
sent by the States. What happened was Tilden did not show up 
with his electors to contest the Republican electors, the 
Democrat electors were not put into place, and so they did not 
have a controversy. That is where this whole idea that I talked 
about earlier of the--that some kind of a deal was made. We do 
not have the actual documentation of that.
    It raises that question as to who is making that decision. 
When you have--if you have competing slates--and in every 
State, you have competing slates. You have the Party A and 
Party B and maybe in some States you have a third slate for 
Party--the Green Party may have a slate of electors.
    Different States have--you know, some of them vote by 
congressional district. Some of them have different ways of 
doing it.
    The bottom line is, how do you make a decision? That is 
really where it comes back to Congress making that decision.
    That is why you had the framework, I believe, with the 
electoral college, and then it has to come to Congress and 
Congress makes that decision.
    I think that to say that States are not permitted, what is 
the punishment if they do? I do not know. I mean, when you end 
up with competing slates in an area where there is a legitimate 
contest--and we can disagree State by State as to what was 
legitimate and what was not legitimate in 2020.
    Looking forward, if we are going to do something like this, 
it needs to be more than a paragraph and it needs to be very, 
very clear as to what the rules are, because we are going to 
have more problems as a result of this. I think we are creating 
more problems than we are solving by far, and I think we are 
creating constitutional questions that we have not even 
envisioned yet in this discussion.
    I would hope that everybody would vote no. If we want to 
have hearings on this particular subject and try to sort out 
something--I think it is going to have to be a lot more 
complicated than a single paragraph--that is something we will 
have to decide as we go further.
    I am not agreeing that we should. I am just saying it 
raises all kinds of interesting legal issues in my mind. I 
think tonight the answer needs to be no.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman yields back.
    Is there further debate on the amendment?
    Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The question is then on the amendment from 
Mr. Morelle, I believe to be the final amendment of our 
evening.
    All those in favor, say aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Does any other Member seek recognition?
    If not, the question now occurs on the Amendment in the 
Nature of a Substitute.
    All those in favor, vote aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the 
Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute is agreed to.
    Ms. Lee.
    Ms. Lee. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee report 
H.R. 4563 favorably to the House, as amended, with the 
recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and the bill do 
pass.
    Chairman Steil. The question is on the motion offered by 
Representative Lee of Florida.
    All those in favor, say aye.
    All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the 
motion is agreed to.
    Mr. Morelle. I ask for a recorded vote.
    Chairman Steil. A recorded vote has been requested. A roll 
call vote is ordered. The clerk will please call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil?
    Chairman Steil. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Steil votes aye.
    Mr. Loudermilk?
    Mr. Loudermilk. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye.
    Mr. Griffith?
    Mr. Griffith. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Griffith votes aye.
    Dr. Murphy?
    Dr. Murphy. Aye.
    The Clerk. Dr. Murphy votes aye.
    Mrs. Bice?
    Mrs. Bice. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Bice votes aye.
    Mr. Carey?
    Mr. Carey. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Carey votes aye.
    Mr. D'Esposito?
    Mr. D'Esposito. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. D'Esposito votes aye.
    Ms. Lee?
    Ms. Lee. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lee votes aye.
    Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Morelle votes no.
    Ms. Sewell?
    Ms. Sewell. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sewell votes no.
    Mr. Kilmer?
    Mr. Kilmer. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Kilmer votes no.
    Mrs. Torres?
    Mrs. Torres. No.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Torres votes no.
    Chairman Steil. Does any Member wish to change their vote?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, on this vote, there are eight ayes 
and four noes.
    Chairman Steil. The motion is agreed to.
    This concludes the order of business for today's meeting. 
Pursuant to House Rule IX, clause 2(l), Members will have the 
requisite period to file with the clerk of the Committee 
supplemental additional minority and dissenting views.
    I assume that is your preference, Mr. Morelle?
    Mr. Morelle. Yes. I have no objection, Mr. Chairman.
    I also want to use the opportunity, if I might, to thank 
the hardworking staffs on both sides and also the Office of 
Legislative Counsel, particularly Noah Wofsy, Parker Johnson, 
as well as the hard work of always smiling county clerk--or 
Committee clerk Hillary Lassiter. I want to thank them for 
their hard work as well.
    I will yield back.
    [Applause.]
    Dr. Murphy. Mr. Chairman, if I could have a word.
    Mr. Morelle. Deputy Clerk William Johnson. I forgot 
William.
    [Applause.]
    Dr. Murphy. A point of order.
    Chairman Steil. The gentleman has a point of order?
    Dr. Murphy. Just a personal privilege, actually.
    My applause goes to the Democratic staff that literally 
must have sat around with a keg of beer and thought of 
everything possible that we could vote on. Thank you.
    Mr. Morelle. Trust me, we had more.
    Chairman Steil. That is not a successful point of order.
    I will also say we appreciate all the work of the staff and 
the Members today. A long day, a long night ahead of us yet.
    I will finalize with saying also, without objection, 
Committee staff are authorized to make technical and conforming 
changes.
    If there is no further business, I want to thank the 
Members for their participation.
    Without objection, the Committee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 9:22 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]