[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 4 (Friday, January 6, 2017)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E31-E33]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
REGARDING JOINT SESSION OF CONGRESS TO COUNT ELECTORAL BALLOTS
_____
HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE
of texas
in the house of representatives
Friday, January 6, 2017
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the House
Committees on the
[[Page E32]]
Judiciary and Homeland Security Committee; Ranking Member of the
Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and
Investigations, and the Congressional Voting Rights Caucus, I rise
today to offer thoughts and reflections on the congressional
responsibility to bear witness to the counting of electoral votes to
determine formally the persons elected President and Vice President of
the United States and on the campaign and election that brought us to
this day.
Historians will surely record that the 2016 presidential campaign was
one for the ages.
The two leading protagonists could not have been more dissimilar.
The Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton of New York, was widely
considered the most qualified person ever nominated for the office,
having served as Secretary of State; elected by landslide margins to
two terms as U.S. Senator from New York, the nation's only First Lady
to win high elective office in her own right; valedictorian of her
class at Wellesley University, a graduate of Yale Law School, and the
first woman ever to win the presidential nomination of one of the
nation's two major political parties.
Republican Donald Trump of New York, the other candidate, was sui
generis as well, since he is the first person to gain an Electoral
College majority with no experience whatsoever in elective or appointed
governmental office or public service but possessing a remarkable
talent for attracting media attention.
The 2016 was notable also for a number of other unprecedented
occurrences.
For example, it was the first time in history that a Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation had ever injected himself and his
agency, unintentionally or not, in a presidential campaign when FBI
Director James Comey held a July 5, 2016 news conference, during which
he announced that the FBI had completed its investigation regarding the
email server of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and had
concluded that no violation of law had been committed but offered
unfavorable personal opinions ex cathedra regarding Secretary Clinton's
conduct.
Compounding the damage inflicted on Secretary Clinton's campaign by
his gratuitous commentary, FBI Director Comey exacerbated the damage
already done when, a mere eleven days before Election Day, he sent a
vaguely worded letter to partisan Congressional Republican opponents of
Secretary Clinton allowing them to leak the letter to the media and
claim falsely that the FBI had reopened the investigation for the sole
purpose of inflicting electoral damage on Secretary Clinton.
These actions were taken in contravention of long-standing Department
of Justice policy, practice, and custom enjoining Justice Department
officials and employees from engaging any conduct or taking any legal
action that could impact the outcome of an election to be held within
the ensuing 60 days.
The 2016 presidential election was historic in another respect as
well; it is the first American presidential election that the
Intelligence Community has confirmed was the subject of cyberattacks
and other subversive activities of entities allied with the Government
of Russia that were undertaken for the express purpose of influencing
the outcome of the 2016 presidential election to secure the election of
its preferred candidate, Donald Trump.
It is also worth noting that the 2016 presidential campaign was the
first in history in which one of the two leading candidates, Donald
Trump, openly invited a hostile foreign power to launch cyberattacks
against his political opponent.
In at least one respect, however, the 2016 presidential campaign was
not unprecedented.
It was the fifth time in history, and the second in the last 16
years, that the candidate winning an Electoral College majority lost
the popular vote.
But what is unusual is the historic margin of the popular vote defeat
produced by the 2016 campaign that saw Hillary Clinton defeat Donald
Trump by an astounding 2.86 million votes: 65,844,610 votes to
62,979,636, nearly six times more than Vice-President Al Gore's popular
vote win in 2000, the next highest victory margin.
Indeed, Hillary Clinton received more votes for president than any
person in history not named Barack Obama, which means that the two
greatest vote getters in American political history are an African
American male and white female, which in itself is a testament to how
far America has travelled on the path to equality and opportunity for
all in the past 240 years.
While it is true that a switch of less than 80,000 votes in just
three states--Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin--would have secured
an Electoral College majority for Hillary Clinton, that fact is of
little consolation and practical consequence to the situation and task
now before us, which is to count the electoral votes cast for President
and Vice-President of the United States and announce the results to the
country and the world.
It is, as I noted at the outset, a duty imposed on Members of the
House and the Senate by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
But because we are all called upon to bear witness to the counting of
electoral votes does not mean our role is to be passive observers.
On the contrary, the Constitution and the law, specifically Section
15 of the Electoral College Act, 3 U.S.C. Sec. 1 et seq., vests in
Representatives and Senators the power and responsibility of objecting
to the counting of any vote cast by an elector if in their judgment the
vote was not ``regularly given'' or the person casting the vote was not
``lawfully certified'' as an elector.
The Constitution devolves this solemn duty upon the people's
representatives, the Congress, because the linchpin of representative
democracy is public confidence in the political system, regime, and
community.
That confidence in turn rests upon the extent to which the public has
faith that the system employed to select its leaders accurately
reflects its preferences.
At bottom, this means that all citizens casting a vote have a
fundamental right and reasonable expectation that their votes count and
are counted.
This concern is particularly salient when it comes to today's
counting of the electoral votes occurring in the aftermath of the
unprecedented interference by a hostile foreign power to secure victory
for its preferred candidate.
And the salience is heightened by the fact that the November 8, 2016
election is the first presidential election held since the Supreme
Court issued the notorious decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which
neutered the preclearance provisions of the Voting Rights Act and
adversely affected the ability of hundreds of thousands of persons to
cast a ballot and have their vote counted.
For these reasons, I owe it to my constituents and to the American
people to consider each electoral vote certificate as it is presented
and accept those that appear to be meritorious but to oppose those
which in my judgment do not appear to satisfy the statutory requirement
that the votes reflected on the lists were ``regularly given'' by
``lawfully certified'' electors.
I am particularly skeptical that this legal standard is met where
there is evidence to support the following conclusions:
1. There is a failure to provide ``distinct lists of votes'' for the
President and Vice President as required by U.S. Constitution, Article
II, Section 1 and Amendment XII; and by 3 U.S.C. Sec. 9;
2. There is a failure of one or more elector to reside in the
district from which elected as required under state law;
3. There appears to be a violation of state statutes prohibiting
electors from holding multiple governmental offices of trust, honor, or
profit;
4. There is compelling evidence that the illegal activities engaged
in by individuals and entities allied with the Government of Russia
that were undertaken for the purpose of benefitting the candidacy of
Donald J. Trump deterred and dissuaded thousands of voters from
exercising their franchise; or
5. There is compelling evidence that activities engaged in by state
officials violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and disenfranchised
thousands of voters and resulted in the unlawful certification of
electors.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me say for the record that where, as is the
case this year, the results in the Electoral College and of the popular
vote diverge by the largest and most astounding margin in American
history, it is particularly fitting, appropriate, and necessary to
examine the electoral vote certificate presented for acceptance as
carefully and fairly as possible and for as long as time permits.
The fate of our democracy is at stake. I now submit formal letters to
the Vice President regarding objection to certification of Electors in
certain states:
Congress of the United States,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, January 6, 2017.
Basis of Objection: Failure of one or more elector to reside
in district from which elected.
Hon. Joseph R. Biden,
Vice President of the United States and President of the
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Vice President Biden: We object to the 15 votes from
the State of North Carolina for Donald J. Trump for President
and Mike Pence for Vice President. Notwithstanding the
certification by the Governor of the State of North Carolina,
it is the opinion of the undersigned that these 15 votes were
not regularly given because at least five electors were not
``lawfully certified'' and their votes were not ``regularly
given'' since one or more electors does not reside in the
district for which he or she was elected as required by state
law.
Additionally, several activities engaged in by state
officials in violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965
disenfranchised thousands of North Carolina voters and
resulted in the
[[Page E33]]
unlawful certification of electors. Accordingly, no electoral
vote of the State of North Carolina should be counted for
Donald J. Trump for President or for Mike Pence for Vice
President.
Respectfully,
Sheila Jackson Lee,
U.S. Representative, State of Texas.
____
Congress of the United States,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, January 6, 2017.
Basis of Objection: Violation of state statutes prohibiting
dual-office holding.
Hon. Joseph R. Biden,
Vice President of the United States and President of the
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Vice President Biden: We object to the 20 votes from
the State of Pennsylvania for Donald J. Trump for President
and Mike Pence for Vice President. Notwithstanding the
certification by the Governor of the State of Pennsylvania,
it is the opinion of the undersigned that these 20 votes were
not regularly given because they were cast by electors not
lawfully certified since they are in violation of state law
prohibiting dual-office holding.
Additionally, it appears that illegal activities engaged in
by individuals and entities allied with the Government of
Russia that were undertaken for the purpose to benefitting
the candidacy of Donald J. Trump deterred and dissuaded
thousands of voters from exercising their franchise and
resulted in votes not regularly given by electors not
lawfully certified. Accordingly, no electoral vote of the
State of Pennsylvania should be counted for Donald J. Trump
for President or for Mike Pence for Vice President.
Respectfully,
Sheila Jackson Lee,
U.S. Representative, State of Texas.
____
Congress of the United States,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, January 6, 2017.
Basis of Objection: Failure to provide ``distinct lists of
votes'' for the President and Vice President.
Hon. Joseph R. Biden,
Vice President of the United States and President of the
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Vice President Biden: We object to the 10 votes from
the State of Wisconsin for Donald J. Trump for President and
Mike Pence for Vice President. Notwithstanding the
certification by the Governor of the State of Wisconsin, it
is the opinion of the undersigned that these 10 votes were
not regularly given because they fail to comply with 3 U.S.C.
Sec. 9, which requires that ``electors shall make and sign
six certificates of all the votes given by them, each of
which certificates shall contain two distinct lists, one of
the votes for President and the other of the votes for Vice
President[.]''
Additionally, it appears that illegal activities engaged in
by individuals and entities allied with the Government of
Russia that were undertaken for the purpose to benefitting
the candidacy of Donald J. Trump deterred and dissuaded
thousands of voters from exercising their franchise and
resulted in votes not regularly given by electors not
lawfully certified. Accordingly, no electoral vote of the
State of Wisconsin should be counted for Donald J. Trump for
President or for Mike Pence for Vice President.
Respectfully,
Sheila Jackson Lee,
U.S. Representative, State of Texas.
____________________