[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 195 (Tuesday, November 17, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H5799-H5800]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        THE FOUNDATION OF DEMOCRACY IS THE INTEGRITY OF THE VOTE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McClintock) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, the nature of democracy is that in every 
election there is a winner and a loser. The success of democracy 
depends on the loser believing the vote was fair and accepting the 
result. You see, the vote is not the foundation of democracy, the 
integrity of the vote is its foundation.
  That is just as important for the winner as it is for the loser. The 
winners depend on the integrity of the vote for their legitimacy. The 
loser depends on it for their acceptance.
  That is precisely the issue in the aftermath of this election. The 
widespread allegations of illegal votes and illegal processes must be 
resolved before the election can confer legitimacy. Among those 
questions are the acceptance of ballots received after election day, 
votes cast by ineligible voters, backdated ballots, illegally 
duplicated ballots, voting systems that misallocated votes, and the 
counting of votes outside any meaningful observation.
  Now, there is either evidence to support these allegations or there 
is not. Fortunately, we are blessed with a well-established system of 
administrative and judicial review to answer these questions.
  Georgia, for example, is now undertaking an audit and hand count. The 
audit should resolve some concerns over illegal votes, and the hand 
count should resolve concerns over illegal processes. Meanwhile, judges 
across the country are hearing complaints and weighing the evidence to 
support similar concerns.
  So I rise today to ask that we all calm down, stop the hyperbolic 
rhetoric, and allow this process to unfold as it should. Our system is 
more than capable of working through these issues and providing answers 
that can satisfy both sides.
  We also need to ask ourselves why so many Americans currently believe 
the election was riddled with fraud. I think it is because so many 
safeguards built into our system have been removed.
  We call it ``election day'' for a reason. Until recently, we all 
waited until the campaigns were over and every candidate had their say.
  Then on a single day, election day, we personally went to the polling 
place in our community in what George Will calls ``the communion of 
democracy.'' We all took the time because we knew it was important. We 
brought our children to watch the process, and we taught them to 
respect it.
  The polling place was often at a neighbor's garage or the local 
elementary school. Each of us looked our neighbors on the precinct 
board in the eye as we identified ourselves and signed the roll. They 
then handed us our ballot. We immediately took that ballot into a 
curtained booth where no one could look over our shoulder or plead or 
threaten or cajole us to vote a certain way. We cast our vote in 
absolute privacy, according to our own conscience, and then handed the 
ballot back to our neighbor, who immediately placed it into a locked 
box in the presence of observers from all parties.
  It was very hard to commit fraud in such a system because every 
ballot had a clear and simple chain of custody. At 8 p.m., the total 
number of votes was known, and the count began under the watchful eye 
of observers, and we usually knew the results of most races by 10 
o'clock that night, midnight if it was close.
  Now, consider how we have perverted that simple and secure process 
that we once prided ourselves upon. Today ballots are mailed out to 
voter rolls that contain untold numbers of people who have moved or 
died. There is no chain of custody from the time the ballot is mailed 
until the time it is returned. In many States, ballot harvesters can 
knock on doors and collect these surplus ballots.
  Even legitimate votes can be cast weeks before the debate is 
concluded and under the duress of family or friends or precinct 
workers.
  This corrupted process cannot continue. Even if it doesn't rob our 
elections of their actual legitimacy, it certainly robs them of their 
perceived legitimacy, destroying the trust that the

[[Page H5800]]

loser of any election must have to accept and respect the will of the 
electorate.
  The old process assured the presumption of fairness. The new process 
offers none. Acceptance of an election cannot be obtained by 
browbeating. It can only be earned by a full and open review of the 
integrity of the election establishing for all Americans that their 
vote was fairly and accurately recorded and that the result speaks as 
the will of the Nation. And I eagerly await that day.

                          ____________________