[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 115 (Tuesday, June 23, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3140-S3143]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                      Nomination of Cory T. Wilson

  Mrs. HYDE-SMITH. Madam President, it is an honor to speak on behalf 
of Judge Cory Wilson of Mississippi and in support of his nomination to 
the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
  I have known Judge Wilson for many years. His experience and legal 
knowledge make him an excellent choice to serve on the appellate court. 
Numerous colleagues of Judge Wilson's from different backgrounds and 
political affiliations have risen in support of his nomination and 
spoken to his personal qualities.
  After his impressive nomination hearing and an outpouring of support 
from Mississippians, who know him best, there is no question that Judge 
Wilson will be a fair and impartial judge who follows the rule of law. 
Judge Cory Wilson will serve on the Fifth Circuit with honor, 
dedication, and distinction.
  I am also pleased a judge from Mississippi will mark a historic day 
as the 200th Federal judge to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate during 
the Trump administration. Judge Wilson's confirmation represents a 
pivotal point in the President's work to ensure there are more smart, 
conservative jurists in the Federal judiciary. Under the leadership of 
President Trump and Leader McConnell, the Senate has prioritized 
confirming bright, well-qualified men and women who will serve our 
country for years to come.
  I am proud to support Judge Cory Wilson and urge my colleagues to 
approve his nomination.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 4033

  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Madam President, I come to the floor today to urge the 
Senate to address the threat the coronavirus poses to our elections and 
to take immediate action to pass my legislation to ensure voters do not 
have to choose between their right to vote and their own health.
  Today is Election Day in Kentucky and in New York and in Virginia. 
There are runoff elections in North Carolina and in Mississippi, as 
well. As we speak, voters in the States are experiencing what it is to 
vote in the middle of a global pandemic. If the past few months are any 
indication, for many, casting a ballot today will not be safe, and it 
will not be easy. The coronavirus has caused unprecedented disruptions 
in the daily lives of Americans.
  In order to protect voters and poll workers, this pandemic has forced 
us to make changes to how we vote. Sixteen States postponed their 
Presidential primaries or have transitioned their primaries to almost 
entirely voting by mail. We have seen Democratic and Republican 
Governors across the country issue waivers allowing all voters to cast 
their ballots by mail during the pandemic. This includes States like 
New Hampshire, with a Republican Governor, and States like Ohio, where 
they have a Republican Governor who is focused on vote by mail, and 
States like Maryland, where the Governor has been devoted to vote by 
mail, and States like Missouri.
  While it is important that individual States are taking action to 
protect voters during this pandemic, we must remember that, in the end, 
this is a national pandemic. It is not just a pandemic in Vermont or in 
Utah; it is national.
  It is the responsibility of this Nation, of this Nation's government, 
and of this Congress to ensure that States have the funds they need to 
make our elections more resilient and to make sure voters don't have to 
risk their health to cast their ballots.
  When we have a national threat or international conflict, we do not 
expect an individual State to be able to respond. In World War II, when 
Pearl Harbor was bombed, we didn't say: Oh, Hawaii, you go deal with 
that yourself.
  We, in this Congress, have acknowledged that this pandemic has 
national consequences in how we responded with the CARES Act and how 
the House has responded with the Heroes Act, which I hope we will 
consider very soon in this Congress, and just the fact that, when it 
comes to voting, this Congress, with bipartisan support--this Senate 
voted to give over $400 million originally to the States.
  There were some issues with how that money was given out that we are 
trying to fix, but, nevertheless, it was a downpayment on the fact that 
even in the beginning of the pandemic, based on what we had seen in 
Wisconsin, we anticipated that there were going to be problems for 
voting and that there was going to be a massive change in how our 
elections were held.
  You have States like New York State where only 5 percent of people 
have voted by mail in the past few Federal elections and States like my 
own State of Minnesota where, despite having the highest voter turnout 
in the country, only 25 percent of people on average voted by mail. Now 
you are seeing switch overs where 50 percent, 60 percent of the people 
in every single State in the Nation are asking to vote from home or, in 
the alternative, they are asking for safe voting places by keeping 
voting places open longer for early voting, by training poll workers so 
we do not depend on our senior citizens to be staffing the polling 
locations when they are the most vulnerable to the coronavirus. This is 
common sense.
  This is why you see Republican Governors and Republican secretaries 
of state joining Democratic Governors and Democratic secretaries of 
state all across the Nation to ask for help from Washington.
  Today, in Kentucky, New York, and Virginia, election officials are 
putting more than $36 million of Federal funding to good use--funding 
to recruit and train new poll workers, to provide those workers with 
protective equipment and sanitizing supplies; funding to pay for 
postage for mail-in ballots, purchase additional equipment, and cover 
the costs of moving poll locations to accommodate more people. I am 
proud of having fought to secure that funding.
  I appreciate Senator Blunt, my colleague, who I know is going to be 
here shortly and is the chair of the Rules Committee, for assisting in 
making sure that funding was designated, as well as Senator Shelby, 
Senator Leahy, Senator Coons, and so many others who have worked on 
this important issue.
  It is a good first step, but let us remember these are still the 
primaries in a few States. If you talk to election officials across the 
country, they will tell you that it wasn't enough and that they 
desperately need more resources for the general election when so many 
more people vote. Support from the Federal Government is vital because 
we have seen States struggle when it comes to administering elections 
during the pandemic. We also know it is not as if they have a reservoir 
of funding right now to deal with, which is one of the reasons we want 
to pass the Heroes Act.

  Many of our State and local governments are struggling right now. 
That is why it is so important to designate funding as we move 
forward--and I hope we will soon discuss the Heroes Act--to be able to 
help pay for elections.
  Support from the Federal Government is vital because we have seen 
States struggle when it comes to administering elections. With fewer 
than 6 months left before the general election, Congress must act now 
to ensure that States have the resources and funding that they need.
  A lot of times you hear: Well, it is only 6 months, so why would we 
do funding now? Look at the fact that we were able to at least assure 
the States that the money was going to be out there for them a few 
months ago for the primaries, and they were able either to spend their 
own money because they knew that money was coming or to spend 
designated money. That is how this works.
  We are no longer in a normal situation. We are in a situation where 
States are having to rearrange how they do elections all over the 
country to make it safe and to allow people to vote from home. We have 
seen the

[[Page S3141]]

chaos and disenfranchisement that will happen if we don't act soon.
  The Wisconsin primary will forever be etched in the memory of our 
Nation. Voters stood for hours in the cold and rain, wearing garbage 
bags and homemade masks, just to be able to exercise their right to 
vote. In Milwaukee, there were just five polling locations open instead 
of the usual 180. Almost 600,000 people live in Milwaukee, including 
one-third of that State's African-American population. The closure of 
so many polling places made it even harder for people without easy 
access to transportation to get to a polling location, and it caused 
unnecessary crowding, with lines to vote wrapping around blocks. As a 
result, voters were disenfranchised, and some even contracted the 
coronavirus. According to local health officials, nearly 70 people in 
Wisconsin who either voted in person or served as poll workers 
contracted the virus as a result of that election.
  Earlier this month in Georgia, thousands of people went to the polls 
and were also met with long lines and confusion. Reports from Atlanta 
indicate voters faced malfunctioning machines, and some voters never 
received the mail-in ballots they requested. Instead of being able to 
safely vote from home, many were forced to show up in person on 
election day. I was particularly struck by the words of Anita Heard, an 
80-year-old woman from Atlanta who actually marched with Dr. King. She 
was the first person in line at her polling location at 6 a.m. waiting 
to vote this year. Anita called the long lines and waits unfair and 
ridiculous. She is right.
  In Fulton County, one voter, who is a mom, sat on a lawn chair 
holding her infant son in one hand and umbrella in another. She waited 
more than 3 hours to vote. She wasn't leaving because it was important 
to her and her son that one day she would be able to tell him she 
waited to vote for him.
  In America, people should not have to wonder if voting machines will 
be operational or if they are going to be able to receive their ballot 
on time to make it count.
  Jose Andres--the remarkable chef who helps feed people in areas 
struck by natural disasters--announced a plan to provide food, water, 
and resources to help people standing for hours in line on election 
day. He is doing his part to address this issue, as are so many people 
across this country, including, as I mentioned, Democratic and 
Republican secretaries of state and Governors.
  I appreciate that Senator Blunt, the chairman of the Rules Committee, 
is here. As I said, he worked to help us get that initial funding. 
Experts have warned that today in Kentucky we may see a repeat of the 
chaos that we have seen in early primaries. Reports indicate fewer than 
200 polling places are open in the entire State, down from the 3,700 in 
a typical election year. We are glad that Kentucky has voted by mail 
and a number of people have voted from home.
  I think we also know, just based on what we have seen in these other 
States--this is just based on facts, not on partisanship--that 200 
polling locations in a State of that size will not be enough in the 
primary and certainly will not be enough in a general election. In 
order to protect the right to vote, we have to learn from States that 
are taking steps to make voting safe and easy.
  Primary turnout this year has broken records in many States, 
especially when it comes to voting by mail. States like Nebraska, Iowa, 
South Dakota, New Mexico, Idaho, West Virginia, and North Dakota have 
all held successful elections this year by relying heavily on voting by 
mail. Again, that is in a primary where some of these States have fewer 
voters--not all of them--because they are smaller population States, 
and many of them are not dealing with a general election.
  In West Virginia, mail-in ballots increased from just 25,000 in 2018 
to over 200,000 this year. In Pennsylvania, the number of mail-in 
ballots cast increased from 80,000 in 2018 to over 1.5 million this 
year. Voters and election officials across the country in Red States 
and Blue States are turning to casting a ballot from home.
  In addition to the five States that already hold their elections 
mostly by mail, which are Utah, Oregon, Colorado, Hawaii, and 
Washington--and I note that those States are not all Blue States, 
including, particularly, Utah, and Colorado, which is known as a Purple 
State--three States, including California, Nevada, New Jersey, and also 
the District of Columbia have decided to send all voters absentee 
ballots for elections this year. There are 13 States that have decided 
to send all voters absentee ballot applications.
  These decisions weren't made, as I note, on a partisan basis. Both 
Republican and Democratic officials in States have decided to implement 
these policies to protect their voters.
  I will also note that none of the five States that held their 
elections primarily by mail this year have had major voter fraud 
scandals since transitioning to vote by mail. As the New York Times 
editorial board announced, States who use vote by mail encountered 
essentially zero fraud.
  Oregon, the pioneer in this area, has sent out more than 100 million 
mail-in ballots since 2000 and has documented only about a dozen cases 
of proven fraud. Rounded to the seventh decimal point, that is 
0.0000001 percent of all votes cast.
  We have all seen the President's tweets on this. We know these tweets 
are meant to hurt our democracy, and people shouldn't fall for it 
because I just gave you the facts: 0.000001 percent of all votes cast 
in the States that have been using this forever involved any fraud.
  We must set the record straight. I appreciate that Senator Romney 
recently noted that nearly everyone, in what he called his very 
Republican State of Utah, votes by mail, and, in his words, it works 
very, very well.
  Now is the time to reject efforts to undermine our political system 
and mostly undermining people's attempts to exercise their fundamental 
right to vote safely. What are you going to tell a veteran who has a 
preexisting condition, like the guy who wrote me who served in Vietnam 
and said what is he supposed to do now? We have to allow them to vote 
from home.
  In the midst of this pandemic, we need to make sure no voter has to 
choose between their health and exercising their right to vote. That is 
why I am urging my colleagues to support my legislation with Senator 
Ron Wyden, which is cosponsored by 35 other Senators, the Natural 
Disaster and Emergency Ballot Act, to help State election officials 
meet this pandemic head-on.
  Our legislation doesn't require us to reinvent how we vote. Instead, 
our bill would overcome the challenges posed by the coronavirus by 
expanding existing election practices like voting by mail and early 
voting. It starts with guaranteeing every American the option to vote 
by mail. Sixteen States require voters to provide an excuse if they 
want to cast a ballot by mail. But during the pandemic, 13 of these 
States are allowing all voters to cast a ballot by mail without needing 
to provide an excuse--Democratic and Republican Governors and 
secretaries of states. That is progress.
  I would say, while we still have three States that are still denying 
all voters the option to vote by mail--forcing them to choose between 
their health and their constitutional right and go through these hoops 
to do it--why not put a standard in place on the Federal level? That is 
what our bill does.
  Our legislation would also get help to the States. Again, my friend, 
Senator Blunt, is here, and I appreciate--while he hasn't put a dollar 
amount on it, his interest in looking at funding for this beyond this 
bill, I think, is very helpful.
  Our bill called for $3.6 billion, which is what is in the Heroes Act, 
of funding to safely administer elections. It would knock down 
barriers, this bill, to safely vote, like the requirement to have your 
ballot signed by a witness or a notary. These are requirements that 
disproportionately hurt minority voters--people without as much money.
  There is one story of a person sitting in a hospital room trying to 
get someone to notarize a primary ballot through a glass window--
someone who has coronavirus. Are we really going to require them to do 
that? Are we really going to do that? That is what you have to ask 
yourself, colleagues. The bottom line is, it shouldn't be this hard to 
vote.
  I am proud that this bill has been endorsed by more than a dozen 
organizations, including the group founded by

[[Page S3142]]

former First Lady Michelle Obama, including Voto Latino, including the 
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights, the National Urban League, Common 
Cause, the Leadership Conference for Civil and Human Rights.
  As I noted, the CARES Act included funding. It didn't include the 
standards that I think are necessary but included the funding. That is 
just the beginning. That was a downpayment--negotiating in the middle 
of the night. I know that because I was talking to my colleagues back 
then.
  This is the real deal, to be able to help States in the general 
election. This money was included in the Heroes Act. Public health 
experts have warned over and over again of the possibility of a new 
wave of this virus in the fall. We have to be ready. States are having 
this happen anyway, and we should make sure that they have the funding 
to do it.
  I know we are going to be discussing the National Defense 
Authorization Act in the next few weeks, at some point. I think about 
that. Our defense is important, but, remember, this is about the 
defense of our democracy. The simple idea that this was a democracy; 
that it is not a dictatorship; that people should be able to go out 
there and exercise their right to vote no matter how they are going to 
vote, no matter what party they are going to vote for, and this is the 
moment--and because of this pandemic, we need to do it.
  The last thing I will mention, three polls released in the last 
couple of months show an overwhelming majority of voters--over 80 
percent favor measures to make voting safe and easy. One of the polls 
conducted in six battleground States showed that 74 percent of voters 
wanted their Senators to support legislation in Congress to implement 
voting reforms, including a majority of Republican voters. Think about 
that. Voters across party lines want Congress to pass legislation that 
would guarantee the right to vote by mail and provide funding to States 
and make sure it is safe to vote. That is what this is about.
  Again, I thank my colleague, Senator Blunt, for all he has done and 
the fact that he was able to work with us when we did negotiate the 
CARES Act to make sure there was some funding included, as well as I 
mentioned Senator Shelby, Senator Coons, Senator Leahy, and others. Now 
is the time to prepare for what we have ahead; that is, making sure 
everyone can vote safely
  Madam President, as in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent 
that the Rules Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 
4033, the Natural Disaster and Emergency Ballot Act of 2020, and the 
Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I further ask that the 
bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no 
intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection?
  The Senator from Missouri.
  Mr. BLUNT. Madam President, reserving the right to object and with 
great consideration for Senator Klobuchar's dedication on these issues, 
many of which, as she has pointed out, we have worked together on, and 
I think we will continue to, I just don't think this is the time to 
make this kind of fundamental change.
  I will admit that at its very first legislation after the 2018 
elections, the House passed a bill, but, again, it was a bill that 
would provide the Federal Government with unprecedented control over 
elections in this country, despite the fact that for almost 250 years 
now, the States have been responsible for this particular government 
responsibility. To quote yet another time, Senator and then-President 
Obama, in October of 2016, pointed out that the very strength of our 
system was the diversity of the system. I think one of the strengths of 
the system is the amount of local responsibility and local 
answerability, frankly, for how the system works on election day.
  Senator Klobuchar pointed out that we are fewer than 6 months until 
the election. As a matter of fact, in our committee, I intend to hold a 
hearing next month on the problems we have seen develop with this move 
toward more people wanting to vote not at the polling place on election 
day and how some States have dealt with those problems effectively and 
how others haven't.
  I will also say, to follow up on one of Senator Klobuchar's points, I 
think funding is one thing. Helping the States help themselves is 
something I think we can still do. We have done a considerable amount 
of that up until now, since the 2016 elections, with a big commitment 
in the CARES Act to make money available for States to regulate their 
elections and be able to afford to do that. I think we can, will, and 
should take another look at that, but 6 months before an election is a 
dangerous time to change responsibility.
  I think, to be absolutely clear, that at any time, this is a 
responsibility that is better done at the local level. But when you 
implement a new voting system with a big first election, that is a 
problem.
  We saw that in Georgia recently. Georgia was complying with the 
request that both Senator Klobuchar and I and others had made to get a 
system in place that has an auditable ballot trail--an absolutely 
worthy goal. Georgia followed up, but even then, it might have been 
better if they could have followed up on an election that wasn't quite 
the same high-profile, high-turnout election that their first 
experience had.
  The responsibility for changing the system is hard enough in the best 
of times. I think the States have had lots of time. My State and other 
States have changed their law to allow more access to absentee ballots 
in some States--and as a matter of fact, not even absentee ballots. I 
got corrected by that with one of our election officials the other day. 
Really, now we call them mail-in ballots. In Missouri, up until now, we 
always called them absentee ballots. Though, one of the absentee 
excuses had always been ``unable to get to the polls because of 
health.'' But in the mail-in ballot ability, in our State, to 
eliminate, for some ballots because of COVID-19 or health--eliminate 
the notary requirement, States have done this. They had a lot of time. 
They had a lot of notice. Most of them dealt with this. More 
importantly, if it works, they get the credit. If it doesn't work, they 
don't have anybody else to blame. They are working really hard because 
of that to make it work.
  The House bill was offered the first time in this body not long after 
it passed. In March of 2000, I objected, again, to the federalization 
of the election process--not the assistance, not the help but the 
federalization of the process.
  In May of 2020, the House passed yet another bill. I think that is 
the bill we are talking about today or something like it. This time, it 
was a bill that Democrats said would assist States with the pandemic. 
First, we were going to assist States because of ballot security. Now 
we are going to assist States because of the pandemic.
  There has been a real desire at the Federal level to take over the 
election process again. I don't think that is a good idea. If it was a 
good idea, it wouldn't be a good idea 6 months before the election.
  The provisions in the new bill are about the same as the provisions 
in the old bill. They would provide the Federal Government with 
unprecedented control over elections in this country. This bill 
represents a one-size-fits-all Federal answer to a problem that I think 
the Federal Government is not the best place to answer.
  The estimated money needs of the States are something I am willing 
to, and think we should, continue to talk about. But funding to accept 
the new situation they find themselves in is different than 
centralizing the process.
  Instead of providing States with flexibility to deal with emergency 
situations, for instance, this bill does just the opposite. This bill 
tells States how to run virtually every aspect of their election. It 
takes away authority to the States to determine their own process for 
voter registration. In fact, it requires all States to institute online 
voter registration at a time when we are more concerned than we used to 
be about what can happen to elections online.
  This bill tells States how many days of early voting they must have 
and where the early voting locations need to be. It requires that all 
States accept online absentee ballot requests. You

[[Page S3143]]

have online voter registration. Then you have online absentee ballot 
requests and offers the requirement for no-excuse absentee ballots, 
which I guess, according to my friend, the election administrator, 
would be mail ballots. I am going to get better at explaining that 
phrase. It tells States how and when their ballots must be delivered. 
It tells them when they have to be counted. It requires States to 
permit ballot harvesting.
  Ballot harvesting is the only thing, I think in a decade, that a 
candidate elected to the House of Representatives was not seated 
because the House--this House, the current House of Representatives--
decided that ballot harvesting was the reason that person shouldn't be 
seated; that people went around, collected ballots, apparently decided 
which ballots they were going to mail in and which ballots they were 
not going to mail in--if you look at the House determination that this 
person wasn't lawfully elected. But this bill actually requires States 
to allow individuals to go and collect ballots and turn them in, in 
groups rather than some other way.
  If States want to do that, they can do that. But apparently, it was 
not good enough to seat a Member of the House of Representatives from 
my party. It tells States how they must authenticate their ballots. It 
prohibits them, however, from using any form of voter identification to 
authenticate who the person is. It tells States what kind of envelopes 
they have to use to put their ballots in.
  What doesn't it do? It doesn't recognize, again, that for almost 250 
years, States have successfully run elections in this country. If the 
returns were in question, the people who were the local election 
officials and the State election officials were the people who were 
questioned. There was no ability to say ``Well, that is out of our 
hands'' or ``Well, we don't really have anything to say about that. 
Some person in Washington tells us what we have to do about that.''

  States have successfully run elections during national disasters. 
States have successfully run elections during pandemics. States have 
successfully run elections during wartime.
  On March 3, 2020, on Super Tuesday, early that morning, a tornado 
struck three counties in Tennessee. Election officials were able to use 
the flexibility they had as State officials to, No. 1, adjust the 
polling location and, No. 2, move election equipment and carry out the 
primary election successfully and without challenge. None of that, in 
my view would have been allowed if this bill had been in effect.
  Similarly, in response to the pandemic, many States, as I suggested 
Missouri has, have changed their law and looked for ways to make this 
process work. They have had a chance to try--in most cases already in 
the primary or in some other elections, States have changed their 
primary dates; they have expanded absentee balloting; they have 
expanded early voting; they have altered polling place procedures to 
ensure cleaning and sanitizing; and they have worked to recruit more 
workers.
  This bill, in my view, doesn't acknowledge the important 
responsibility and answerability that local and State officials have on 
election day. That was a job I had for about 20 years, part of that as 
the chief election official in the State. I will just state that on 
election day nothing is more important than voters feeling like their 
vote was cast in the right way and counted in the right way, and there 
was nobody but me to blame at the county level and then again at the 
State level if that didn't happen.
  So I think my friend Senator Klobuchar's comments are well-intended 
and well-motivated. I just think we have a fundamental difference on 
who makes these decisions. I would recommend to all of my colleagues 
that if we ever make these kinds of changes, we should make them long 
before 6 months before a Presidential election. If this bill were law, 
State and local officials would not only lose the flexibility they now 
have, but they would have a new place to pass the buck.
  This is one of the desks that Harry Truman used on the Senate floor, 
and he didn't have a ``pass the buck'' symbol yet, but he famously had 
behind his desk, as President, a sign that said ``The buck stops 
here.'' On these issues, the buck stops with the person you have chosen 
locally and statewide to run your elections. I think that continues to 
be the best course for us to follow.
  Madam President, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Hyde-Smith). Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Minnesota.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Madam President, I want to thank my colleague for his 
work and his friendship. We obviously don't agree on every aspect of 
this. I did enjoy hearing his desk story. I didn't know he had Harry 
Truman's desk. When I got to the Senate, I asked for the desk of Hubert 
Humphrey, the ``happy warrior,'' and about 8 months later, the desk 
arrived, and they had accidentally given me the desk of Gordon 
Humphrey, the former Senator from New Hampshire, and I had it for quite 
a while. In a new Senate, I one day opened up the desktop and saw that 
they had replaced it with the desk of Hubert Humphrey. So I would give 
these comments in the spirit of the ``happy warrior''; that is, while 
you and I disagree on setting these standards, at this moment I think 
we should; I think if not now, when?
  When it comes to things such as not having notaries for getting a 
ballot and things like that, I am heartened by the fact that, No. 1, we 
have a hearing, which has been asked for--I think it is really 
important, and I appreciate that--on this upcoming election.
  No. 2, you continue to be open to discussing with me and with the 
Appropriations Committee the funding as we go into November. I think 
that is really going to be important for all voters, whether in red, 
blue, or purple States. We know that so many people vote by mail, 
including the President of the United States with a ballot from Palm 
Beach, FL. We all want to have that ability and make sure people in our 
States have an ability to either vote by mail or vote safely at the 
polling places this fall.
  Thank you very much.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming