[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 165 (Wednesday, September 23, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5809-S5810]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Election Security

  Mr. BLUNT. Madam President, I want to talk for a few minutes about 
securing our election process.
  At various times, in the last 4 years, there have been different 
levels of reasons why the Federal Government needed to take over the 
election process. For a while, it was that the process was too easily 
infiltrated by outside influences, and then it was COVID-19, and it was 
important that everybody vote in different ways than they have ever 
voted before, and somehow only the Federal Government could manage 
that.
  I would say that, in that, just as we look toward the 2020 elections, 
we have spent over $1 billion. I think it is $1.2 billion in funding 
from the Congress. We have had dozens of hearings in the Rules 
Committee, the Judiciary Committee, and the Homeland Security 
Committee. There was a 3\1/2\-year bipartisan investigation that I was 
part of as part of the Intelligence Committee, and we have looked at 
this about every way we can.
  Right now, people across the country are beginning the process of 
casting their votes. This year, more than any other year up until now, 
we will have election day, but, really, we will have more like 
``election month,'' and, in some States, it is going to be ``election 6 
weeks'' or ``election 7 weeks.''
  So this process is starting right now. It is a process where people 
will decide who represents them in the White House and the Congress; 
or, in some cases, in city hall; in many cases, the Governor's mansion; 
and in almost all cases, the general assembly; and in all cases, the 
U.S. House of Representatives.
  Confidence in the voting process is the thread that holds the fabric 
of democracy together. Every time we needlessly get into a discussion 
about whether this process is fair or safe, I think it is harmful. 
Every time we need to have that discussion about whether it is fair or 
safe, it is, of course, not only helpful but totally appropriate.
  This is the time when we need to be sure that our work has brought us 
to a good conclusion, rather than talking about the fact that the 
system is not going to work. The system is going to work. As the 
chairman of the Rules Committee, where we have the principal election 
jurisdiction, or as a member of the Intelligence Committee, I spent a 
lot of time looking at this. I think we have been very serious in the 
Senate, particularly, in considering these issues and at looking at the 
threats to our election system itself.
  I am not going to talk much in the next few minutes about false 
information and other things. In my view, all you have to do is turn on 
the television to find some false information and watch the campaign 
commercials. There is a nugget of truth, perhaps, but most of them--
many of them have little more than a nugget of truth in them.
  Sure, I am concerned about false information. I am particularly 
concerned about it if it comes from foreign governments, from those who 
wish our country ill. But there is a lot of information out there--a 
lot more information than there has ever been before--and people should 
be very thoughtful about the information they take in.
  I am not going to talk a lot about that. I want to talk about the 
election system itself because, in my view, the election-day system is 
as secure as it has ever been. The registration system is as secure as 
it has ever been.
  Four years ago, the Obama administration--a little later than this--
said: There is a big problem, and we are going to declare the election 
structure a structure of national significance, and we are going to 
play a different role than we have ever played before.
  There was no anticipation that this was going to happen and not much 
discussion.
  Election officials all over the country immediately said: Oh, no, you 
are not. You are not going to just decide in October of an election 
year that you are going to take over the election system and declare it 
a system of national significance, a system of critical significance to 
the future of the Nation.
  Of course it is, but it didn't become that in October of 2016.
  But the message was clear that we needed to build those stronger ties 
with local and State election authorities. We needed to do everything 
we

[[Page S5810]]

could, as we saw the efforts by some foreign actors and some people in 
their basements trying to see if they could get into the voter 
registration system and do something with it. We have done more of 
that--well, we have done all we can think of, in my view. We did a lot 
of it before 2018, and that never stopped.
  For 20 years, Congress has done all we can think of to help make the 
system work better. We have spent over $1 billion in the past 4 years. 
We have encouraged them to update, and we have seen updates of 
antiquated systems. Systems that didn't have a ballot trail and other 
things have all been generally replaced, and where they haven't been, I 
think they are on even higher alert. We have helped them increase their 
cyber security. We have responded to COVID-19 with help to local 
governments, which in some cases was used for establishing polling 
places and even maybe paying extra to election judges.
  While we provided those resources, it has been for a long time and 
still is up to local and State officials, who are the closest to the 
people they work for, to do everything they can to secure those 
elections. I spent about 20 years doing that, part of it as a local 
election official in Missouri, a county official, and part of it as the 
Missouri secretary of state, the chief election official.
  Earlier this month, I had a chance to be in Kansas City when the 
county clerks and election authorities were all meeting. Most of them 
were there at a distanced meeting to talk about election 
responsibility. Others were virtually there to talk again about the 
absolute commitment they have made to the people they work for to 
conduct elections in a way that is both free and fair. I think that is 
what is going to happen.
  Clearly, again, there are efforts by foreign adversaries--Russia, 
China, Iran, North Korea, and others--to interfere with our elections, 
but we want to be sure and I believe have been sure that Federal 
agencies have been providing the resources they needed to investigate 
bad actors, to punish bad actors, and to do everything they could to 
protect the American election system.
  We are in a much different place than we were 4 years ago. Election 
authorities--State and, in many cases, local--know the name of the 
person at Homeland Security with whom they have had now a 4-year 
relationship or a 2-year relationship or a 1-year relationship, and 
when they get a call the day before the election, they are going to 
know that is a call from somebody who not only is there to help them 
that day but has been there to help them up until now.
  The Rules Committee has held four hearings since the 2018 election--
one on election security, one on how we are preparing for the 2020 
election, one on oversight of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 
and in addition to that, putting people on the Federal Election 
Commission to fill vacancies that had been there for a long time.
  The Judiciary Committee has looked into things like the social media 
companies that are trying to stop disinformation.
  Homeland Security has drawn out a roadmap and has put the kinds of 
protections into the system that you want to have in the system for 
equipment that counts votes, the registration system that is available 
on election day.
  The Intelligence Committee, as I said before, conducted a 3\1/2\-year 
investigation on foreign meddling in the last election, and the 
administration is holding those perpetrators accountable.
  The Justice Department has secured indictments against three Russian 
companies. Twenty-six people involved with Russia's influence campaign 
in 2016 have been impacted by that. The Justice Department has 
sanctioned 46 other people and 18 businesses.
  One of the things we didn't have in 2016 was a cyber offense. We had 
a cyber defense and I think the best in the world at that moment--I 
hope it still is--but we didn't have a cyber offense
  I remember being in an Intel hearing in 2017--this was early 2017--
when the question was put to our intel community: Have you ever been 
told by the President of the United States that you should have 
offensive action taken against these bad actors? The answer by all of 
them was no. But it was March or April of 2017. The President of the 
United States who hadn't given that direction for the previous years 
was not the current President, who, not too long after that, did give 
that direction.
  By 2018, when we sought cyber offense, we had our own cyber offense. 
They know who they are, and they know the price they paid and the price 
they would pay again. Thousands of members of the intelligence 
community have been working to keep an eye on that part of keeping our 
elections secure.
  Providing Federal support to State and local officials is the right 
approach. Frankly, I have been in favor of providing a little more yet 
this year, but that appears to be part of a bill that we just can't 
seem to agree to even though somewhere between the targeted Senate bill 
and the Problem Solvers' bipartisan bill in the House that was released 
a week or so ago, there is clearly a settlement there that would likely 
include a little more election security assistance. But we are getting 
pretty late to add much to the system; we need to now be sure that what 
is in the system really works. We don't need a Federal takeover.
  Many of you heard me say before that late in 2016, President Obama 
said: ``There is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow 
that you could even rig America's elections, in part because they're so 
decentralized in the numbers of votes involved.'' I think he is exactly 
right. The diversity of the system is the strength of the system.
  I personally think the best place to vote is at a polling place on 
election day. I don't always get to vote that way. But if you want to 
have all the information that happens between the start of the campaign 
and the day you vote, the only way you get that is voting on election 
day. If you want to see your ballot go into a ballot box or into the 
counting system and know that happened, you better get that on election 
day.
  But many people will vote in other ways, particularly this year. 
Usually, the other ways are a little more complicated, but they are 
still protected by comparison of signatures in most States. Usually, 
there is still going to be included an indication on the voter roll 
that goes to the polling place that somebody has already received 
another ballot. There are safeguards there.
  For reasons we all understand, more people are going to vote earlier 
in this election than ever before. I know our election officials in our 
State and I suspect all over the country are planning for what they can 
do to still have the most information available possible on election 
night, but it is unlikely that we are going to know everything we want 
to know on election night.
  If you don't want to vote at a polling place on election day or can't 
vote at a polling place on election day, you should still vote. 
Confidence in everything you hear or read should not be complete, but I 
think confidence that the election system itself is going to tabulate 
the results that came in and the votes that were cast is a pretty safe 
bet.
  Politics can become heated and noisy during an election season, but 
at the end of the day, the American people need to understand that we 
are doing all we can to give them the ability to cast their ballots 
with minimal obstacles and maximum confidence that what happens on 
election day is what the voters voted to do on election day.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Perdue). The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business for up to 20 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________