[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 4 (Wednesday, January 6, 2021)]
[House]
[Pages H94-H115]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]





                        MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE



 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  January 6, 2021, on page H94, the following appeared: I wish to 
remind Members that we have to reduce the number of Members on the 
floor to the gallery to witness the proceedings from there, in a 
relative number. So first come, first serve.

                          --------------


                        MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

  
  The online version has been corrected to delete the Bodoni dash 
and reset the header following the Bodoni dash as a small cap 
title.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 


  A message from the Senate by Ms. Byrd, one of its clerks, announced 
that the Secretary of the Senate shall inform the House of 
Representatives that the Senate is ready to proceed in joint session 
with the further counting of the electoral votes for President and Vice 
President.
  At 11:35 p.m., the Sergeant at Arms, Paul D. Irving, announced the 
Vice President and the Senate of the United States.
  The Senate entered the Hall of the House of Representatives, headed 
by the Vice President and the Secretary of the Senate, the Members and 
officers of the House rising to receive them.
  The Vice President took his seat as the Presiding Officer of the 
joint convention of the two Houses, the Speaker of the House occupying 
the chair on his left. Senators took seats to the right of the rostrum 
as prescribed by law.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. The joint session of Congress to count the 
electoral vote will resume. The tellers will take their chairs.
  The two Houses retired to consider separately and decide upon the 
vote of the State of Arizona, to which an objection has been filed.
  The Secretary of the Senate will report the action of the Senate.
  The Secretary of the Senate read the order of the Senate, as follows:

       Ordered, That the Senate by a vote of 6 ayes to 93 nays 
     rejects the objection to the electoral votes cast in the 
     State of Arizona for Joseph R. Biden, Jr., for President and 
     Kamala D. Harris for Vice President.

  The VICE PRESIDENT. The Clerk of the House will report the action of 
the House.
  The Clerk of the House read the order of the House, as follows:

       Ordered, That the House of Representatives rejects the 
     objection to the electoral vote of the State of Arizona.

  The VICE PRESIDENT. Pursuant to the law, chapter 1 of title 3, United 
States Code, because the two Houses have not sustained the objection, 
the original certificate submitted by the State of Arizona will be 
counted as provided therein.
  The tellers will now record and announce the vote of the State of 
Arkansas for President and Vice President in accordance with the action 
of the two Houses.
  This certificate from Arkansas, the Parliamentarian has advised me, 
is the only certificate of vote from that State, and purports to be a 
return from the State, and that has annexed to it a certificate from an 
authority of that State purporting to appoint or ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of Arkansas seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State 
of Florida received 6 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the 
State of Indiana received 6 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Arkansas that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from California, 
the Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote 
from that State that purports to be a return from the State and that 
has annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State 
purporting to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of 
the State of California seems to be regular in form and authentic, and 
it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of 
Delaware received 55 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris of the 
State of California received 55 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of California that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Colorado, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State, and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the State of Colorado seems to be regular in form and authentic, and 
it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of 
Delaware received 9 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris of the 
State of California received 9 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Colorado that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Connecticut, 
the Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote 
from that State that purports to be a return from the State and that 
has annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State 
purporting to appoint or ascertain electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of Connecticut seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 7 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 7 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Connecticut that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  2345

  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Delaware, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of Delaware seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 3 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 3 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Delaware that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from the District 
of Columbia, the Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only 
certificate of vote from the District that purports to be a return from 
the District and that has annexed to it a certificate from an authority 
of the District purporting to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the District of Columbia seems to be regular in form and authentic, 
and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of 
Delaware received 3 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris of the 
State of California received 3 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the District of Columbia that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Florida, the

[[Page H95]]

Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of 
the State of Florida seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it 
appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 
29 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of Indiana 
received 29 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Florida that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Georgia, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of Georgia seems to be regular in form and authentic, 
and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of 
Delaware received 16 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris of the 
State of California received 16 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. For what purpose does the gentleman from Georgia 
(Mr. Hice) rise?
  Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. President, myself, members of the Georgia 
delegation, and some 74 of my Republican colleagues and I object to the 
electoral vote from the State of Georgia on the grounds that the 
election conducted on November 3 was faulty and fraudulent due to 
unilateral actions by the secretary of state to unlawfully change the 
State's election process without approval from the General Assembly and 
thereby setting the stage for an unprecedented amount of fraud and 
irregularities. I have signed the objection myself.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Sections 15 and 17 of title 3, United States 
Code, require that any objection be presented in writing and signed by 
a Member of the House of Representatives and a Senator.
  Is the objection in writing and signed by a Member and a Senator?
  Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. President, prior to the actions and events 
of today, we did, but following the events of today, it appears that 
some Senators have withdrawn their objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. In that case, the objection cannot be 
entertained.
  This certificate from Hawaii, the Parliamentarian has advised me, is 
the only certificate of vote from that State that purports to be a 
return from the State and that has annexed to it a certificate from an 
authority of the State purporting to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of Hawaii seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 4 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 4 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Hawaii that the teller has verified 
appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Idaho, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the State of Idaho seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it 
appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 
4 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of Indiana 
received 4 votes for Vice President.

  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Idaho that the teller has certified 
appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Illinois, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of Illinois seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 20 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 20 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Illinois that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Indiana, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of Indiana seems to be regular in form and authentic, 
and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida 
received 11 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of 
Indiana received 11 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Indiana that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Iowa, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of 
the State of Iowa seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it 
appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida received 
6 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of Indiana 
received 6 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Iowa that the teller has verified 
appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Kansas, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the State of Kansas seems to be regular in form and authentic, and 
it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida 
received 6 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of 
Indiana received 6 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Kansas that the teller has verified 
appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from the 
Commonwealth of Kentucky, the Parliamentarian has advised me, is the 
only certificate of vote from that State that purports to be a return 
from the State and that has annexed to it a certificate from an 
authority of the State purporting to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of 
the Commonwealth of Kentucky seems to be regular in form and authentic, 
and it appears therefrom that Donald J.

[[Page H96]]

Trump of the State of Florida received 8 votes for President and 
Michael R. Pence of the State of Indiana received 8 votes for Vice 
President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the Commonwealth of Kentucky that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Louisiana, 
the Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote 
from that State that purports to be a return from the State and that 
has annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State 
purporting to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of Louisiana seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of 
Florida received 8 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the 
State of Indiana received 8 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Louisiana that the teller has 
verified to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Maine, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of Maine seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 3 votes for President, and Donald J. Trump 
of the State of Florida received 1 vote for President and Kamala D. 
Harris of the State of California received 3 votes for Vice President, 
and Michael R. Pence of the State of Indiana received 1 vote for Vice 
President.

  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Maine that the teller has verified 
appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Maryland, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the State of Maryland seems to be regular in form and authentic, and 
it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of 
Delaware received 10 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris of the 
State of California received 10 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Maryland that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from 
Massachusetts, the Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only 
certificate of vote from that State that purports to be a return from 
the State and that has annexed to it a certificate from an authority of 
the State purporting to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of electoral vote of the 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 11 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 11 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that the 
teller has verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Michigan, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate from an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of Michigan seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 16 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 16 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. For what reason does the gentlewoman from Georgia 
(Mrs. Greene) rise?
  Mrs. GREENE of Georgia. Mr. President, I, along with 70 of my 
Republican colleagues, object to the counting of the electoral votes 
for the State of Michigan on the grounds that the error rate exceeds 
the FEC rate allowed at 0.0008 percent, and that the people who signed 
affidavits at risk of perjury, their voices have not been heard in a 
court of law.

                              {time}  0000

  The VICE PRESIDENT. Sections 15 and 17 of title 3 of the U.S. Code, 
require that any objection be presented in writing and signed by a 
Member of the House of Representatives and a Senator.
  Is the objection in writing and signed by a Member and a Senator?
  Mrs. GREENE of Georgia. The objection is in writing, not signed by a 
Senator.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. In that case, the objection cannot be 
entertained.
  Are there any further objections to counting the certificate of the 
vote from the State of Michigan that the teller has verified appears to 
be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing no further objections, this certificate 
from Minnesota, the Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only 
certificate of vote from that State that purports to be a return from 
the State and that has annexed to it a certificate of an authority of 
the State purporting to appoint or ascertain electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of Minnesota seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 10 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 10 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote from the State of Minnesota that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Mississippi, 
the Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate of an authority of the State purporting to 
appoint or ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of Mississippi seems to be regular in form 
and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the 
State of Florida received 6 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of 
the State of Indiana received 6 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote from the State of Mississippi that the teller 
has verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Missouri, the 
Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of vote from that 
State that purports to be a return from the State and that has annexed 
to it a certificate of an authority of the State purporting to appoint 
or ascertain electors.
  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the State of Missouri seems to be regular in form and authentic, and 
it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida 
received 10 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of 
Indiana received 10 votes for Vice President.

[[Page H97]]

  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote from the State of Missouri that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Montana, the 
Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of vote from that 
State that purports to be a return from the State and that has annexed 
to it a certificate of an authority of the State purporting to appoint 
or ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of 
the State of Montana seems to be regular in form and authentic, and it 
appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump from the State of Florida 
received 3 votes for President and Michael R. Pence from the State of 
Indiana received 3 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote from the State of Montana that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Nebraska, the 
Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of vote from that 
State that purports to be a return from the State and that has annexed 
to it a certificate of an authority of the State purporting to appoint 
or ascertain electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of Nebraska seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State 
of Florida received 4 votes for President; and Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of 
the State of Delaware received 1 vote for President; and Michael R. 
Pence of the State of Indiana received 4 votes for Vice President; and 
Kamala D. Harris of the State of California received 1 vote for Vice 
President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote from the State of Nebraska that the teller has 
verified is regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Nevada, the 
Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of vote from the 
State that purports to be a return from the State and that has annexed 
to it a certificate of an authority from the State purporting to 
appoint or ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of Nevada seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 4 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 6 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. For what purpose does the gentleman from Alabama 
rise?
  Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. President, I and 55 other Members of the 
United States House of Representatives object to the electoral vote for 
the State of Nevada in order to protect the lawful votes of Nevada and 
all other American citizens.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Sections 15 and 17 of title 3 of the United 
States Code, require that any objection be presented in writing and 
signed by a Member of the House of Representatives and a Senator.
  Is the objection in writing and signed by a Member and a Senator?
  Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. President, it is in writing, but, 
unfortunately, no United States Senator has joined in this effort.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. In that case, the objection cannot be 
entertained.
  Are there any further objections to counting the certificate of vote 
from the State of Nevada that the teller has verified appears to be 
regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. This certificate from New Hampshire, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of electoral 
vote from that State that purports to be a return from the State and 
that has annexed to it a certificate of an authority of the State 
purporting to appoint or ascertain electors.
  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the State of New Hampshire seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 4 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 4 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of New Hampshire that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. This certificate from New Jersey, the 
Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of vote from the 
State that purports to be a return from the State and that has annexed 
to it a certificate of an authority in the State purporting to appoint 
or ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of 
the State of New Jersey seems to be regular in form and authentic, and 
it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of 
Delaware received 14 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris of the 
State of California received 14 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote from the State of New Jersey that the teller 
has verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. This certificate from New Mexico, the 
Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of vote from the 
State that purports to be a return from the State and that has annexed 
to it a certificate of an authority of the State purporting to appoint 
or ascertain electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of New Mexico seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 5 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 5 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote from the State of New Mexico that the teller 
has verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from New York, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
the State that purports to be a return from the State and has annexed 
to it a certificate of an authority from the State purporting to 
appoint or ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of New York seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 29 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 29 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote from the State of New York that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from North 
Carolina, the Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate 
of vote from that State that purports to be a return from the State and 
that has annexed to it a certificate from the State purporting to 
appoint or ascertain electors.

                              {time}  0010

  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the State of North Carolina seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State 
of Florida received 15 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the 
State of Indiana received 15 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of North Carolina that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?

[[Page H98]]

  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from North Dakota, 
the Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote 
from that State, and purports to be a return from the State and that 
has annexed to it a certificate of an authority of the State purporting 
to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of 
the State of North Dakota seems to be regular in form and authentic, 
and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida 
received 3 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of 
Indiana received 3 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of North Dakota that the teller has 
verified as regular and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, the certificate from Ohio, the 
Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of vote from that 
State, and purports to be a return from the State and that has annexed 
to it a certificate of an authority of the State purporting to appoint 
or ascertain electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of Ohio seems to be regular in form and authentic, 
and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida 
received 18 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of 
Indiana received 18 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Ohio that the teller has verified 
is regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Oklahoma, the 
Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of vote from that 
State, and purports to be a return from the State and that has annexed 
to it a certificate of an authority of the State purporting to appoint 
or ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of Oklahoma seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State 
of Florida received 7 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the 
State of Indiana received 7 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Oklahoma that the teller has 
verified to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Oregon, the 
Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of vote from that 
State that purports to be a return from the State and that has a 
certificate of authority from the State annexed to it to appoint and 
ascertain electors.
  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the State of Oregon seems to be regular in form and authentic, and 
it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of 
Delaware received 7 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris of the 
State of California received 7 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Oregon that the teller has verified 
as regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the Parliamentarian has advised, is the 
only certificate of vote from that State that purports to be a return 
from the State and that has annexed to it a certificate from an 
authority of the State purporting to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of 
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 20 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 20 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. For what purpose does the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania rise?
  Mr. PERRY. Mr. President, sadly, but resolutely, I object to the 
electoral votes of my beloved Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on the 
grounds of multiple constitutional infractions that they were not under 
all of the known circumstances regularly given; and on this occasion, I 
have a written objection signed by a Senator and 80 Members of the 
House of Representatives.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Is the objection in writing and signed by a 
Senator?
  Mr. PERRY. Yes, Mr. Vice President, it is.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. An objection presented in writing and signed by 
both a Representative and a Senator complies with the law, chapter 1 of 
title 3, United States Code.
  The Clerk will report the objection.
  The Clerk read the objection as follows:
                                                  January 7, 2021.
       We, a United States Senator and Members of the House of 
     Representatives, object to the counting of the electoral 
     votes of the State of Pennsylvania on the ground that they 
     were not, under all of the known circumstances, regularly 
     given.
     Josh Hawley,
       United States Senator.
     Scott Perry,
       Member of Congress.


                          Members of Congress

       Mo Brooks AL-5, Mike Kelly PA-16, John Joyce PA-13, Fred 
     Keller PA-12, Scott Perry PA-10, Glenn Thompson PA-15, Jim 
     Jordan OH-4, Dan Meuser PA-9, Clay Higgins LA-3, Tom Rice SC-
     7, Yvette Herrell NM-2, Alexander Mooney WV-2, Andy Biggs AZ-
     5, John W. Rose TN-6, W. Greg Steube FL-17, Madison Cawthorn 
     NC-11, Bill Posey FL-8, Jeff Duncan SC-3, Brian Babin TX-36, 
     Louie Gohmert TX-1.
       Brian J. Mast FL-18, Warren Davidson OH-8, Andy Harris MD-
     1, Doug Lamborn CO-5, Kat Cammack FL-3, Tracey Mann KS-1, Bob 
     Good VA-5, Adrian Smith NE-3, Billy Long MO-7, Jack Bergman 
     MI-1, Michael Cloud TX-27, Byron Donalds FL-19, Rick Crawford 
     AR-1, Roger Williams TX-25, Bob Gibbs OH-7, Russ Fulcher 
     ID-1, Richard Hudson NC-8, Ted Budd NC-13, Barry Moore AL-
     2, Lee Zeldin NY-1.
       Jake LaTurner KS-2, David Rouzer NC-7, Jason Smith MO-8, 
     Lauren Boebert CO-3, Paul A. Gosar AZ-4, Chuck Fleischmann 
     TN-3, Tim Burchett TN-2, Chris Jacobs NY-27, Bill Johnson OH-
     6, Andrew S. Clyde GA-9, Lance Gooden TX-5, Randy Feenstra 
     IA-4, Mary E. Miller IL-15, Diana Harshbarger TN-1, Mark E. 
     Green TN-7, Ron Estes KS-4, Neal Dunn FL-2, Ronny Jackson TX-
     13, Elise Stefanik NY-21, Ralph Norman SC-5.
       Joe Wilson SC-2, Vicky Hartzler MO-4, Scott DesJarlais TN-
     4, Marjorie Taylor Greene GA-14, Doug LaMalfa CA-1, Jeff Van 
     Drew NJ-2, Ben Cline VA-6, Michael D. Rogers AL-3, Markwayne 
     Mullin OK-2, Jeff Duncan SC-3, Pat Fallon TX-4, Brad R. 
     Wenstrup OH-2, August Pfluger TX-11, Rob Wittman VA-1, Scott 
     Franklin FL-15, David Kustoff TN-8, Sam Graves MO-6, Matt 
     Gaetz FL-1, Randy K. Weber TX-14.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there further objections to the certificate 
from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair hears none.
  The two Houses will withdraw from joint session. Each House will 
deliberate separately on the pending objection and report its decision 
back to the joint session.
  The Senate will now retire to its Chamber.
  The Senate retired to its Chamber.

                              {time}  0020

  The SPEAKER. Pursuant to Senate Concurrent Resolution 1 and section 
17 of title 3, United States Code, when the two Houses withdraw from 
the joint session to count the electoral vote for separate 
consideration of objection, a Representative may speak to the objection 
for 5 minutes and not more than once. Debate shall not exceed 2 hours, 
after which the Chair shall put the question, Shall the objection be 
agreed to?
  The Clerk will report the objection made in the joint session.
  The Clerk read the objection as follows:
                                                  January 7, 2021.
       We, a United States Senator and Members of the House of 
     Representatives, object to the counting of the electoral 
     votes of the State of Pennsylvania on the ground that they 
     were not, under all of the known circumstances, regularly 
     given.
     Josh Hawley,
       United States Senator.
     Scott Perry,
       Member of Congress.


                          Members of Congress

       Mo Brooks AL-5, Mike Kelly PA-16, John Joyce PA-13, Fred 
     Keller PA-12, Scott Perry

[[Page H99]]

     PA-10, Glenn Thompson PA-15, Jim Jordan OH-4, Dan Meuser PA-
     9, Clay Higgins LA-3, Tom Rice SC-7, Yvette Herrell NM-2, 
     Alexander Mooney WV-2, Andy Biggs AZ-5, John W. Rose TN-6, W. 
     Greg Steube FL-17, Madison Cawthorn NC-11, Bill Posey FL-8, 
     Jeff Duncan SC-3, Brian Babin TX-36, Louie Gohmert TX-1.
       Brian J. Mast FL-18, Warren Davidson OH-8, Andy Harris MD-
     1, Doug Lamborn CO-5, Kat Cammack FL-3, Tracey Mann KS-1, Bob 
     Good VA-5, Adrian Smith NE-3, Billy Long MO-7, Jack Bergman 
     MI-1, Michael Cloud TX-27. Byron Donalds FL-19, Rick Crawford 
     AR-1, Roger Williams TX-25, Bob Gibbs OH-7, Russ Fulcher 
     ID-1, Richard Hudson NC-8, Ted Budd NC-13, Barry Moore AL-
     2, Lee Zeldin NY-1.
       Jake LaTurner KS-2, David Rouzer NC-7, Jason Smith MO-8, 
     Lauren Boebert CO-3, Paul A. Gosar AZ-4, Chuck Fleischmann 
     TN-3, Tim Burchett TN-2, Chris Jacobs NY-27, Bill Johnson OH-
     6, Andrew S. Clyde GA-9, Lance Gooden TX-5, Randy Feenstra 
     IA-4, Mary E. Miller IL-15, Diana Harshbarger TN-1, Mark E. 
     Green TN-7, Ron Estes KS-4, Neal Dunn FL-2, Ronny Jackson TX-
     13, Elise Stefanik NY-21, Ralph Norman SC-5.
       Joe Wilson SC-2, Vicky Hartzler MO-4, Scott DesJarlais TN-
     4, Marjorie Taylor Greene GA-14, Doug LaMalfa CA-1, Jeff Van 
     Drew NJ-2, Ben Cline VA-6, Michael D. Rogers AL-3, Markwayne 
     Mullin OK-2, Pat Fallon TX-4, Brad R. Wenstrup OH-2, August 
     Pfluger TX-11, Rob Wittman VA-1, Scott Franklin FL-15, David 
     Kustoff TN-8, Sam Graves MO-6, Matt Gaetz FL-1, Randy K. 
     Weber TX-14.
  The SPEAKER. The Chair will endeavor to alternate recognition between 
Members speaking in support of the objection and Members speaking in 
opposition to the objection.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. PERRY. Madam Speaker, this is a somber day for the defense of the 
Constitution. You see, the Constitution is just a piece of paper. It 
cannot defend itself. That is why our leaders swear an oath to uphold 
and defend the Constitution, and that is what I am doing here this 
evening.
  The Constitution states: ``The times, places, and manner of holding 
elections . . . shall be prescribed . . . by the legislature''--not the 
courts, not the Governor, not the secretary of state or other 
bureaucrats or elected officials, the legislature.
  In Pennsylvania, the supreme court unilaterally extended the deadline 
for ballots to 3 days after the election. They actually wanted 10. The 
supreme court is not the legislature. The supreme court mandated un-
postmarked ballots to be received, destroying the validity of all the 
votes that were cast timely.
  The supreme court action defied the law, the legislature, and the 
will of the people.
  The supreme court authorized the use of drop boxes, where ballot 
harvesting could occur. The legislature never authorized that form of 
voting, and the court had absolutely no right to do so.
  Responding to the secretary of state, Kathy Boockvar, the supreme 
court ruled that mail-in ballots need not authenticate signatures.
  Once again, the court not only defied the Constitution and the will 
of the people, but by so doing, they created a separate class of 
voters, thereby violating the Equal Protection Clause prescribed in the 
Constitution.
  How can we have two legally separate classes of voters? Yet, the 
court made it so, not the legislature.
  The Constitution doesn't mention the court when determining the time, 
place, and manner of elections because they are not authorized to make 
those decisions. Yet, they did it.
  And the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear the case, denying the 
evidence and denying the demands for justice from the people of 
Pennsylvania and America.
  These aren't my opinions. These aren't partisan viewpoints. These are 
irrefutable facts.
  Six days before the election, guidance emailed from the secretary of 
state required that the counties shall not pre-canvass or canvass any 
mail-in or civilian absentee ballots received between 8 o'clock Tuesday 
and 5 o'clock Friday and that they must be kept separately. That was 6 
days before the election.
  Madam Speaker, 2 days before the election, counties received new 
guidance from the secretary of state, informing counties that they 
shall canvass segregated absentee and mail-in ballots as soon as 
possible upon receipt.
  The secretary of state is not elected by the people. She is not a 
member of the legislature. Yet, she, and she alone, determined the time 
and manner of elections. That was unconstitutional.
  In defiance of a U.S. Supreme Court order that all ballots received 
after election day be segregated, the secretary of state knew, once 
they were canvassed, that is opened and commingled with all the other 
ballots, they would be counted with all the rest.
  And what is the remedy for this defiance, for this lawbreaking? So 
far, the court has decided there is no remedy. There is no penalty for 
this lawlessness, this dilution of lawfully cast votes, this defiance 
of the Constitution--no remedy. When the State legislature requested 
the Governor to convene a special session to address the unanswered 
questions and try to provide a remedy, he refused.
  When votes are accepted under unconstitutional means without fair and 
equal protection for all, the only result can be an illegitimate 
outcome--illegitimate.
  The voters did not create this mess, but the will of the people is 
absolutely being subverted by the deliberate and willful actions of 
individuals defying their oath, the law, and the Constitution.
  In Pennsylvania, we use the Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors, 
or SURE, system as the basis of determining who can vote. 
Unfortunately, a recent attempted audit by the Democrat State auditor 
general concluded that he was unable to establish with any degree of 
reasonable assurance that the SURE system is secure and that 
Pennsylvania voter registration records are complete and accurate.
  That is what we are relying on. That right there. This is the very 
same system used to certify the election in the contest for President 
of the United States. This is the very same system that the State used 
to certify the 2020 election, even though its figures do not match more 
than half of Pennsylvania's 67 counties.

  To this day, right now, while we stand here, how can this election be 
certified using a system that after 2 months still displays that over 
205,000 more votes were cast in Pennsylvania than people who voted in 
the November election? Let me say that again: 205,000 more votes than 
voters.
  Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, to my colleague from Pennsylvania, I will 
say this: I carry the same Constitution that you do. And the 
Constitution, sir, does not allow you, me, or any Member of this body 
to substitute our judgment for that of the American people. It does not 
allow us to disregard the will of the American people. Because under 
this Constitution, under our Constitution, Congress doesn't choose the 
President. The American people do. And they have chosen in resounding 
numbers, as every single Member of this body well understands.
  Madam Speaker, I have been at a loss to explain what happened today, 
but there is a statement that I found that largely summarized my 
thoughts on the matter.
  ``The scenes of mayhem unfolding at the seat of our Nation's 
government'' are a ``sickening and heartbreaking sight. This is how 
election results are disputed in a banana republic, not our democratic 
Republic. I am appalled by the reckless behavior of some political 
leaders since the election and by the lack of respect shown today for 
our institutions, our traditions, and our law enforcement. The violent 
assault on the Capitol, and the disruption of a constitutionally 
mandated meeting of Congress, was undertaken by people whose passions 
have been inflamed by falsehoods and false hopes. Insurrection could do 
grave damage to our Nation and our reputation.
  ``In the United States of America, it is the fundamental 
responsibility of every patriotic citizen to support the rule of law. 
To those who are disappointed in the results of the election: Our 
country is more important than the politics of the moment.''

                              {time}  0030

  Those are not my words. Those are the words of former Republican 
President George W. Bush.
  To my colleagues, it is after midnight tonight. It has been a long 
day

[[Page H100]]

for our country, a long day for our Republic.
  Let us dispense with this. Let's do the right thing. Let's honor our 
oath. Let's certify the results, and let's get back to the work of the 
American people.
  Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Lofgren).
  Ms. LOFGREN. Madam Speaker, our duty today is significant but 
straightforward. We must count the votes of the electors as cast in the 
electoral college and announce the results.
  As discussed, our roles and responsibilities are established by the 
Constitution and Federal law, and they are clear. The facts before us 
are also clear. Pennsylvania submitted one slate of electors, as chosen 
by the voters of the State. The slate was certified according to State 
law. Now those lawful results must be counted and announced.
  Despite disinformation and any number of false claims that you may 
have heard, including here today, as former Attorney General Barr said: 
``We have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a 
different outcome in the election.''
  This is not simply a conclusory statement. The results of the 
election have been litigated. The record is clear: The lawsuits 
challenging the election results failed. They failed because there is 
simply no evidence to support these baseless claims.
  Now, it is one thing to tweet a belief, quite another to provide 
actual evidence. These cases failed because there is no evidence. 
Judges ruled in the lawsuits that the 2020 election was sound.
  It should come as no surprise that Republican officeholders have 
recognized the election results as legitimate and accurately determined 
in an election that was conducted safely, securely, and with integrity.
  We all take an oath to support and defend the Constitution. As we 
near the end of the task before us, let's remember the beginning of the 
Constitution. Before Article II and the 12th Amendment, which spell out 
the electoral college, and before Article I, which creates Congress, 
the Constitution begins with the preamble. The preamble is short and 
bold: ``We the people.''
  The people spoke in historic numbers. Their votes have been counted. 
Their choice is clear. It is time, as the law requires, to announce the 
state of the people's vote.
  The violence and disorder inflicted on our democracy by seditious 
rioters today is an indication of why adherence to our Constitution is 
so vital.
  I urge all of us to stand up for law, for democracy, for our 
Constitution, and to stand up for America and reject this objection.
  Mr. MEUSER. Madam Speaker, I rise to support the objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. MEUSER. Madam Speaker, a day that was intended to debate the 
importance of election integrity and the rule of law tragically became 
a day that will be a black mark in our Nation's history. Nevertheless, 
the work of this House must go on, as America will go on.
  We must all sincerely thank the Capitol Police and Metro Police for 
their selfless actions today, putting their safety and lives on the 
line to protect this House. The lawlessness and violence of today must 
be condemned, just as all violent protests must be condemned.
  Nevertheless, the fact remains, a large number of Pennsylvanians are 
enormously frustrated with actions taken by elected and appointed 
officials in Pennsylvania, which have led to a high level of distrust 
for this past election.
  We have the United States Constitution, which is the reason we have 
been and will continue to be a great country and a country of laws.
  The U.S. Constitution is unambiguous, Madam Speaker, in declaring 
that State legislatures are the entity with the authority to set 
election procedures and to enact any changes to election law. Article 
I, Section 4, Clause 1 states: ``The times, places, and manner of 
holding elections . . . shall be prescribed in each State by the 
legislature thereof.''
  The authority of election procedures lies with the State legislature, 
period.
  In Pennsylvania, this authority was indisputably usurped by the 
Pennsylvania Governor's office, by the Pennsylvania secretary of state, 
and by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
  These unlawful actions include, but are not limited to, accepting 
ballots past 8 p.m. on election day; inconsistent application of 
verified signature requirements for in-person ballots versus mail-in 
ballots; authorizing the curing of mail-in ballots with less than 24 
hours' notice, leading to inconsistent preparedness between counties; 
and authorizing the use of unsecured drop boxes, which is not permitted 
in statute.
  If such unlawful actions are to be accepted, what do we have to look 
forward to next year? The Pennsylvania secretary of state allowing 
online voting because it may be raining in Philadelphia? It was a free-
for-all.
  Madam Speaker, it was back in 2005 when then-Minority Leader Pelosi, 
while leading 31 Democrats as they objected to the Presidential elector 
certification, as they did in the last three Presidential elections 
when a Republican won, stated quite well, actually:
  The Members of Congress have brought this challenge and are speaking 
up for their aggrieved constituents, many of whom have been 
disenfranchised in this process. This is their only opportunity to have 
this debate while the country is listening, and it is appropriate to do 
so.
  Thank you for those words, Madam Speaker. They were appropriate then, 
as they are now.
  If there is an American ideal that all citizens, regardless of party 
affiliation, can agree upon, it is that we must have election 
integrity. We should not certify these electors, which were derived by 
unlawful actions and a result of inaccurate vote tallies.

  Madam Speaker, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Joyce).
  Mr. JOYCE of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the 
objection.
  Tonight, my heart is heavy as we consider the dark acts that 
transpired in this Chamber today. But, Madam Speaker, the American 
people can be assured that violent and irrational attacks on this body 
cannot derail the constitutional responsibility that lies in front of 
us.
  This has always been about upholding the law. It has always been 
about protecting government of, by, and for the people. Preserving the 
rule of law is more important than ever.
  We must acknowledge that unconstitutional acts unduly impacted the 
Presidential election in Pennsylvania. Contrary to law, the supreme 
court extended the deadline for mail-in ballots for 3 days beyond the 
election day. Contrary to law, the secretary of the Commonwealth 
discarded mail-in ballot signature verification safeguards. These 
leaders took advantage of a deadly pandemic and seized the State 
legislature's rightful authority.
  I took an oath to uphold the law and defend the Constitution. I 
pledged to protect free and fair elections. I cannot, in good faith, 
certify electors that were selected under an unlawful process.
  I will object to the electoral college certification to protect the 
will of Pennsylvania voters, to uphold the law, to restore trust in our 
electoral system, and, ultimately, to save our Constitution.
  At Gettysburg, which is in my district, President Abraham Lincoln 
spoke about the great task of ensuring government by, of, and for the 
people shall not perish from the Earth.
  Mr. MICHAEL F. DOYLE of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I rise in 
opposition.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. MICHAEL F. DOYLE of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, nearly 7 million 
Pennsylvanians showed up to vote in the 2020 elections. They cast their 
votes for Democrats and Republicans up and down the ballot, including 
the entire U.S. House delegation, the entire State house, half of the 
State senate, and other State and local races.
  Since the election, there have been allegations of widespread 
election fraud in Pennsylvania; but, remarkably, the 20 suits filed by 
the Trump campaign, Pennsylvania Republicans, and others challenging 
the results in Pennsylvania have never claimed that there was voter 
fraud.

[[Page H101]]

  


                              {time}  0040

  Perhaps that is because attorneys could lose their licenses when they 
make unsubstantiated claims in court. That is where the rubber really 
meets the road.
  So if these lawsuits didn't claim election fraud, what did they 
claim?
  Most of the legal challenges to the Presidential election in 
Pennsylvania question relatively small numbers of ballots that were 
allegedly tainted by technical violations. Even assuming that all of 
these ballots had been cast for Joe Biden, throwing them out wouldn't 
have changed the result of the election.
  Now, one exception is the lawsuit filed by one of our colleagues from 
Pennsylvania, Kelly v. Commonwealth, which would have thrown out all 
the mail-in votes cast in the 2020 general election on the grounds that 
Act 77, the State law allowing those votes, was unconstitutional. That 
suit would have disenfranchised 2\1/2\ million Pennsylvanians. Let's 
let that sink in, 2\1/2\ million Pennsylvanians would have had their 
votes nullified.
  Now, I want to provide my colleagues with some background about the 
State law at the heart of this challenge. In 2019, the Republican-
controlled State legislature approved Act 77, a bipartisan bill to 
reform the State's election laws, which instituted no-excuse mail 
balloting. Act 77 was supported almost unanimously by Republicans in 
the State House and State Senate. In fact, it was unanimous in the 
State Senate and all but two Republicans in the State House.
  Moreover, once this Act was passed, Act 77 had a 120-day period where 
challenges could be filed against the Act if people thought it was 
unconstitutional. Well, 4 months went by, nobody files a challenge. On 
June 3, Pennsylvania had their primary under this new system. Nobody 
challenged the primary election. It was only challenged in November, 
when Republicans didn't get the result they wanted at the top of the 
ticket. Not surprisingly, this case was dismissed by the Pennsylvania 
Supreme Court and an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was denied.
  Another exception is Texas v. Pennsylvania. They asked the court to 
reject the results of the Pennsylvania Presidential contest in 
Pennsylvania and several other States, disenfranchising tens of 
millions of the voters. Seven Republican members of the Pennsylvania 
U.S. House delegation signed the U.S. House Republican brief in support 
of Texas v. Pennsylvania.
  While I feel compelled to point out to my colleagues that the same 
voters who sent them to the 117th Congress cast their votes for the 
President by marking the very same ballots, which were read by the very 
same ballot scanners and monitored by the very same election workers. 
Yet our colleagues who signed the brief only want to invalidate the 
Presidential votes. This is illogical and inconsistent, colleagues, and 
I am pleased to note that the Supreme Court rejected it as well.
  The fact is, the election has received unprecedented scrutiny in the 
courts. I believe it is irresponsible and undemocratic to argue today 
that the U.S. Congress ought to relitigate the 2020 Presidential 
election and second-guess the will of the voters in multiple States, 
the decisions of numerous State and Federal courts, including the 
Supreme Court, and the counts and recounts conducted by State election 
officials.
  There were 20 lawsuits filed in Pennsylvania challenging aspects of 
the Presidential election. In 19 of them you got laughed out of court. 
The one case you won affected roughly 100 votes. Joe Biden and Kamala 
Harris won by over 80,000.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I rise to support the 
objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I rise this evening with 
a heavy heart. The violence that occurred today at the U.S. Capitol was 
senseless, destructive, and counter to our American values.
  This past Sunday, each Member of this body took an oath to uphold the 
United States Constitution. And while the path of least resistance, 
particularly following today's events, would be to remain silent, my 
oath to uphold the Constitution does not permit me to maintain silence.
  While systemic voter fraud was not something proven, we witnessed a 
systemic failure in the application of Pennsylvania's voting law when 
it comes to the 2020 general election.
  In late 2019, the Commonwealth revisited and modernized its election 
law with the bipartisan Act 77. Granted, in late 2019, the 
Commonwealth's legislature did not have the foresight to anticipate how 
COVID-19 would present challenges to voting. Despite that, it is not up 
to the Governor, the secretary of the Commonwealth, nor the State 
supreme court to unilaterally create law.
  The election abuses to Pennsylvania Act 77 taken by the Pennsylvania 
executive branch and upheld by the Pennsylvania judicial branch were 
clearly unconstitutional and had an obvious, if not major, impact on 
the 2020 election, particularly when it comes to the citizens' faith in 
the electoral process.
  Irregularities in Pennsylvania included: Uneven application of the 
law; ballot curing; ignoring signature validation requirements; using 
unsecured drop boxes; accepting ballots beyond the deadlines; and 
interfering with certified poll watcher access, among others.
  These actions were taken by the Commonwealth's Governor and secretary 
of state where the Pennsylvania Supreme Court circumvented the 
authority of the State legislature. Furthermore, the chief law officer 
of the Commonwealth sat idly while this process unfolded.
  Now, I joined many of my colleagues in Pennsylvania requesting the 
legislators in Harrisburg conduct an investigation and audit to ensure 
such negligence will be prevented in future elections.
  I have serious concerns about how these irregularities in the 
application of the Commonwealth's election laws will play in future 
elections. Only with equal application of law will the voters of the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have certainty in their election 
processes.
  Now, I remain committed to ensuring the voters receive an electoral 
system they deserve and where equal application of law is guaranteed. 
If our election integrity is compromised, we have failed the very 
voters who have sent us here to defend the Constitution.
  Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris).
  Mr. HARRIS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  The oath I took is very simple. Madam Speaker, you administered it. 
It is to support and defend the Constitution.
  Now, as you walk back to the office buildings, you will walk by that 
wall that has when the various States accepted that Constitution. 
Remember, when a State accepts the Constitution, it agrees to accept 
every part of the Constitution. It doesn't get to pick and choose.
  Pennsylvania was there when it was written. They were so enthusiastic 
about the Constitution, they approved it in 1787.
  My State, Maryland, is a little further down the wall, 1788. They 
were there when it was written.
  The clause that gave the legislature the power over the elections was 
there when they accepted it. It has been there since. How dare the 
judicial branch or the executive branch of that State usurp the 
legislative authority. That is a clear violation of the Constitution.
  Now, we heard there is no evidence.
  Evidence?
  The Pennsylvania Supreme Court unilaterally extended the deadline to 
receive absentee and mail-in ballots.
  Does anybody contest that over here? Does it say the legislature did 
that?
  No, it doesn't. It says the court did it.
  That is a violation. That is what the Texas lawsuit was all about. We 
disadvantage other States when States like Pennsylvania, the executive 
branch and judicial branch, cheat on the Constitution; and that is what 
they did here.
  But there is more evidence. But wait, there is more. The Democrat 
secretary of the Commonwealth eroded integrity by dismissing signature 
authentication on a ballot.
  Does anyone here believe the Pennsylvania legislature would have 
agreed

[[Page H102]]

to create a separate system for mail-in ballots and in-person ballots? 
That if you mail it in, you don't need a signature? But if you vote in 
person, you do and it has to be authenticated?
  Of course not. The legislature clearly wouldn't have agreed to that. 
But that didn't stop the usurpation of constitutional authority.
  Madam Chair, I vigorously support this objection, and I include in 
the Record the objection to counting the electoral votes for the State 
of Arizona additional signers.

   Objection to Counting the Electoral Votes for the State of Arizona


                           Additional Signers

       Jeff Duncan SC-3
       Matt Gaetz FL-1

                              {time}  0050

  Mr. BRENDAN F. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I rise in 
opposition.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. BRENDAN F. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, tonight, we will 
not be picking the President, for the people did that on November 3. 
Rather, tonight, in this House, we will decide whether American 
democracy survives. Let us be under no illusion. These are the stakes. 
If this objection succeeds and the will of 7 million Pennsylvania 
voters is cast aside, it will be the end of our representative 
democracy.
  Now, there is no reasonable debate about what happened in this 
election in Pennsylvania. Seven million Pennsylvanians voted. Joe Biden 
won by over 81,000 votes. This was certified in 67 counties by 
bipartisan local-elected officials, including Republicans. And every 
single court, whether the judge is a Democrat or a Republican, has 
reaffirmed this outcome.
  The objectors, however, claim we do not know the will of the people 
because the election in Pennsylvania was somehow conducted corruptly. 
Much of their objection centers around the State law passed in 2019 
known as Act 77 that gives voters the option of expanded mail-in 
voting. Objectors are alleging that this law was somehow a brilliant 
plot by Democrats to disadvantage Republicans and rig elections. This 
is laughable.
  Here are the facts. Act 77 was a Republican-led effort in a 
Republican-controlled legislature. Literally, every single Republican 
in the Pennsylvania Senate voted for it. And in the statehouse, the 
vote among Republicans was 105-2.
  Here is what the Republican speaker of the Pennsylvania House had to 
say about Act 77: This bill does not benefit one party or the other or 
any one candidate or single election. It serves to preserve the 
integrity of every election and lift the voice of every voter in the 
Commonwealth.
  So there is no question as to the facts surrounding this election. 
They are as clear as they are overwhelming. The only question that 
remains is this: Will this House reaffirm our fidelity to our 
democracy, or will we end it?
  I must concede, Madam Speaker, I have been naive about one subject. I 
always just assumed our democracy would naturally endure, almost as if 
it was predestined, I never even questioned it until the last several 
years.
  Two centuries ago, one of our Founding Fathers cautioned against this 
notion. John Adams wrote, ``Remember, democracy never lasts long. It 
soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy 
yet that did not commit suicide.''
  I now realize the wisdom of his words. Never again will I take for 
granted our democracy. It must be jealously defended by every 
generation. Always.
  But, Madam Speaker, despite the alarm, I feel that our democracy has 
been brought to this breaking point, as we have seen today. 
Nonetheless, I still maintain hope.
  Growing up in Philadelphia, raised in an immigrant family, I was 
often brought down to visit the historic sights. Every summer, without 
fail, we would spend a day seeing Independence Hall, Congress Hall, the 
Liberty Bell.
  It was at Independence Hall where our Nation was declared free and 
our Constitution born. At the Constitutional Convention, the oldest and 
most widely accomplished delegate was Benjamin Franklin, one of our 
greatest Founding Fathers and my city's greatest citizen.
  On the final day, as the last delegates were signing the 
Constitution, Franklin pointed to the painted Sun on the back of the 
Convention chair. Observing the painters had found it difficult to 
distinguish a rising Sun from a setting Sun, Franklin went on to say:

       I have often, during the course of this session, looked at 
     that Sun without being able to tell whether it was rising or 
     setting. But now, at length, I have the happiness to know it 
     is a rising Sun.

  Madam Speaker, on a day like today, when a mob has stormed the 
Capitol, and some Members are threatening the core of our democracy, it 
can be hard to tell whether for American democracy the Sun is rising or 
setting. But I maintain my faith that tonight, by an overwhelming 
bipartisan majority in Congress, we will uphold the will of ``We the 
People,'' and our democracy will live.
  Mrs. GREENE of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise to support the 
objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentlewoman from Georgia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. GREENE of Georgia. I would like to point out that all the cases 
that have been thrown out have been thrown out on standing, not the 
evidence of voter fraud. I would also like to point out the same people 
who, for 4 years, have failed to find a shred of evidence to convict 
President Trump of Russian collusion are the same people trying to 
discredit hardworking American poll watchers who are risking perjury by 
signing affidavits confirming massive voter fraud in multiple States.
  The same fake news who took the word of Christine Blasey Ford against 
Justice Kavanaugh, who her own friends denied happened, also dismissed 
the sworn under penalty of perjury accounts from people who witnessed 
the election fraud.
  The same fact-checkers who told you that Dominion machines weren't 
connected to the internet and couldn't be hacked are the same people 
telling you that there has been no voter fraud and no violations of 
election law. But it has been proven that these machines are connected 
and that they can be hacked.
  We have heard repeatedly argued that objecting to these ballots is 
unconstitutional and violates the rights of State legislatures. They 
would rather us affirm fraud and pass the buck back to States rather 
than following the process Madison, Hamilton, Jefferson, and the 
Framers of the Constitution designed.
  When States fail to do their job, we are the last line of defense. 
Congress is here for this exact situation. We are here to be the fail-
safe when States refuse to protect the people's votes.
  By objecting today, we are telling the thousands of witnesses who 
signed affidavits that we have their back, and we will not allow local 
officials who violate their own election laws to steal this election 
from those who lawfully voted.

  I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman).
  Mr. NORMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to support the foundation of 
our democracy, the Constitution of the United States of America. This 
document is the fabric and the solid foundation of a nation we call 
America, which has been a beacon of hope and a shining city on the hill 
for over 230 years.
  The words of our Constitution, as spelled out in Article II, Section 
1, are very clear when it comes to our elections: mandating, not 
suggesting, not implying, but mandating that State legislatures, not 
secretaries of State, not State commissions, not county officials, not 
Governors, but State legislators prescribe the time, place, and manner 
of holding elections.
  This mandate was not followed in the great State of Pennsylvania. If 
we allow this fraud to go on--in a football analogy, the moving of the 
goalpost after the ball has been kicked and in the air--the preview of 
coming attractions will be future elections that do not adhere to 
honest and open voting by ``We the People'' and the loss of our great 
Republic.
  As a lady told me not long ago, don't spit in my face and tell me it 
is raining. This is exactly what has happened to the American people in 
this election. In the words of Winston Churchill, when Great Britain 
was under siege by Germany, he said: There will be a

[[Page H103]]

time when doing your best is not good enough. We must do what is 
required.
  And we must do what is required to save this great Republic.
  Ms. WILD. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition.
  The SPEAKER. The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. WILD. Madam Speaker, as terrifying as today was here in the 
people's House, it was, thankfully, fairly short in duration. In 
contrast, the pain and fear that so many Americans are experiencing 
this year has been long and continuous to this very moment.
  Rather than pitting Americans against Americans, as we are here, we 
should be working to ensure rapid distribution of vaccines and adequate 
relief to Americans who are struggling economically because of this 
horrific pandemic. But we are not doing that. Instead, we have 
witnessed a stunning assault on our democracy itself.
  This challenge is not an act of patriotism. The position of the 
objectors is completely incompatible with patriotism.
  Our country is defined by her great people, and our democracy is 
defined above all else by our Constitution, a Constitution that these 
individuals want to ignore because they have decided that their 
judgment, the judgment of a small minority of partisan elites, should 
somehow override that of the more than 155 million Americans who 
participated in this election. That, my friends, is not democracy.

                              {time}  0100

  We should all remember this country's founding was a rejection of 
monarchy, a rejection of the notion that any one person could be all-
powerful. Our commitment to self-determination is what gave rise to our 
Declaration of Independence and our Constitution. It is why our 
Founders made the choice to build a country anchored in respect for the 
rule of law rather than one tied to the whims of men. It is why we have 
free and fair elections that allow us to vote out those who hold 
office.
  I am proud to join the vast majority of my colleagues in both 
Chambers, Republicans and Democrats alike, in making it clear that our 
democracy is bigger than any of us.
  Let's be clear: Joe Biden and Kamala Harris won a victory of 306 
electoral votes in the electoral college, the same margin that 
President Trump won by in 2016 when he called it a landslide.
  Nearly 7 million of my fellow Pennsylvanians braved this devastating 
pandemic and economic crisis to cast their ballots, culminating in a 
total turnout of more than 70 percent, the highest in the history of 
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. And nationwide, we saw record-
breaking turnout.
  Both in Pennsylvania and nationally, the President's efforts to 
overturn the election results in the courts failed resoundingly, with 
many of the strongest rebukes coming from judges the President himself 
appointed.
  In fact, contrary to the assertion of my colleague from Georgia 
across the aisle, not a single lawsuit in Pennsylvania alleged fraud. 
The gentlewoman may not be aware of this, but allegations of fraud 
require specificity and detail, and no lawyer could risk his or her 
license to make such false claims.
  I am heartened that several of the country's leading Republicans, 
including Senate Republican Majority Leader McConnell, Senator Mitt 
Romney, and former Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, have 
spoken out against this political stunt.
  Senator Romney said: ``The egregious ploy to reject electors may 
enhance the political ambition of some, but dangerously threatens our 
democratic Republic.''
  And as former Republican Representative Charlie Dent from my district 
said, the claim by the President of voter fraud in our State ``was 
simply reprehensible; the truth is that he suppressed his own vote by 
discouraging mail-in voting.''
  And as Pennsylvania State Senator Gene Yaw, also a Republican, has 
said: ``My question is, if the mail-in voting of Act 77 was so bad, why 
did The Trump Organization send out a mail-in ballot application to 
every registered Republican in the State?''
  Today, I am thinking of all of the people who took the time to do 
their civic duty and vote, many standing in long lines or painstakingly 
researching how to vote by mail correctly.
  We reject these disgraceful attacks on the voters of Pennsylvania and 
this attempt to throw out their votes.
  To those in this Chamber who may cynically believe that stoking the 
forces of disinformation and division may be worth a short-term benefit 
to their political careers, I would urge serious self-reflection.
  Our democracy is one of the most precious resources of the American 
people, protected against enormous odds and at great sacrifice by each 
generation of servicemembers and everyday citizens who put their lives 
on the line to build a freer and more equitable nation. They deserve 
better than what is happening in this Chamber today.
  Mr. SMUCKER. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SMUCKER. Madam Speaker, I would like to start by making two basic 
points:
  Number one, individual States who administer elections must ensure 
that they are conducted fairly, uniformly, and in accordance with the 
law; and
  Number two, every American wants to be, and deserves to be, confident 
that our elections are secure and that all eligible legal votes are 
counted accurately and in a transparent manner.
  And I will say this. In my district in Lancaster and York Counties, I 
think that occurred. I am very proud of my county election officials, 
who upheld the Pennsylvania Constitution and followed the letter of the 
law; but, unfortunately, that sentiment is not shared across the 
Commonwealth.
  Today, my objection is not about voter fraud; it is grounded on 
unconstitutional measures taken by bureaucrats and partisan justices in 
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania that have unlawfully changed how this 
election was carried out. This potentially changed the outcome and 
certainly caused millions of our States' voters to question the 
election results. Other speakers have outlined this issue.
  In brief, the Pennsylvania State Legislature, in 2019, passed a 
bipartisan election law reform bill, and then the partisan Pennsylvania 
Supreme Court took it upon themselves to rewrite that law just 7 weeks 
before the election. They unlawfully legislated from the bench and made 
substantive changes to the law, including allowing for unsecured drop 
boxes and ordering that ballots received after the election be counted, 
among other things.
  The Pennsylvania Secretary of State took it even further. Her 
unilateral, unconstitutional changes resulted in counties treating 
ballots differently so that some voters had the opportunity to change 
mail-in ballots to correct deficiencies, while in other counties, their 
ballots simply were not counted.
  As Members of Congress, we serve as a voice for our constituents. 
This is the one time I have a voice in this process, and I cannot 
simply look away when tens of thousands of my constituents have real 
and legitimate concerns about how this election was conducted in 
Pennsylvania.
  In fact, I think an inadequate response to those concerns by 
Pennsylvania officials is one of the major problems. Simple measures 
like audits should be routine and random and supported by both parties, 
and I believe they are critical for restoring faith in Pennsylvania's 
elections moving forward.

  The bottom line for my constituents is that Pennsylvania's officials, 
at all levels, failed to conduct a uniform and legal election, and for 
that reason, they inappropriately and unlawfully certified the State's 
electors.
  Madam Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Keller), my colleague.
  Mr. KELLER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Smucker) for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, the violence that occurred in the Capitol today was 
shameful, unacceptable, and un-American. We are a nation of laws, not 
lawlessness, and we will never give in to the mob.
  Thank you to the men and women of our Capitol Police and other law 
enforcement agencies who heroically defended this building.
  The criminal behavior we witnessed today does not erase the facts 
before us.

[[Page H104]]

  I am objecting to the certification of Pennsylvania's electoral votes 
because Governor Tom Wolf, Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar, and the 
Pennsylvania Supreme Court violated the State legislature's clear 
constitutional authority to set election proceedings.
  Under the Pennsylvania Constitution, only the General Assembly has 
the power to set election law.
  Additionally, Article II of the U.S. Constitution explicitly grants 
State legislatures, not the Governor acting alone and not the courts, 
the explicit power to determine the manner of appointing Presidential 
electors.
  Pennsylvania's court unlawfully extended the deadline to receive 
absentee and mail-in ballots. Governor Wolf's administration dismissed 
signature authentication procedures for absentee and mail-in ballots, 
allowed for the uneven administration of the election across counties, 
and unilaterally changed Pennsylvania's election code without the State 
legislature's consent.
  The Constitution is clear and the facts are indisputable.
  This past weekend, each Member of this body stood in this Chamber and 
swore an oath to protect and defend our Constitution. I intend to 
fulfill my constitutional oath which the people of Pennsylvania have 
entrusted in me. My objection is grounded in the Constitution and rule 
of law.
  If we allow the Governor to violate the constitutional rights of the 
General Assembly, what is stopping him from violating the 
constitutional rights of the 12.8 million Pennsylvanians our State 
legislators were elected to represent?
  Mr. EVANS. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. EVANS. Madam Speaker, I represent the Third District of 
Pennsylvania, which includes part of Philadelphia, the birthplace of 
America. It was in Philadelphia that the Constitution of the United 
States was written and signed, the very Constitution that we are all 
sworn to uphold as Members of the House of Representatives.
  We are elected to serve our constituents, and it is our job to 
represent them and their interests in Congress.
  Yesterday, I spoke to the son of the late Dick Thornburgh, who is a 
two-time Republican Governor of Pennsylvania and was Attorney General 
under President Ronald Reagan and President Bush. His son stressed to 
me that his father would have wanted the rule of law to prevail 
regardless of the political outcome, because he cared more about the 
safeguarding of democracy than partisanship.
  In addition, Al Schmidt, who was a Republican commissioner of 
elections, said, when Philadelphia certified its results on November 
23: ``I'm proud that the birthplace of our Republic held the most 
transparent and secure election in the history of Philadelphia.''
  Instead of using this time to dispute the results of our fair and 
lawful election, we should be spending this time making sure vaccines 
are quickly given to essential workers and our most vulnerable 
communities, that people are getting housing.
  We should look at rental assistance. We should ensure that that is 
available.
  Small businesses, the engines of our economy, should be getting 
needed grants and loans.
  That should be our focus.
  Hospitals desperately need support and help. We should be paying 
attention to the needs of hospitals.
  We are in the middle of a pandemic where hundreds of thousands of 
people are dying, and we are in a recession that is putting millions of 
Americans at risk of hunger, homelessness, or both. It is time we start 
legislating for the people.

  One last person I want to mention is our junior Senator, Senator 
Toomey. There are very few things that he and I agree on, but he has 
stated very clearly that Joe Biden has won this election. He has stood 
up on the Senate floor and he has stated that.
  So it needs to be very clear that the late Governor Thornburgh; 
Albert Schmidt, the commissioner; and our current junior Senator all 
have one thing in common: democracy first, partisanship second. Let's 
keep that in mind.
  Ms. HERRELL. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the objection.
  The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New Mexico for 
5 minutes.
  Ms. HERRELL. Madam Speaker, this is not how I imagined my first 
speech in the House of Representatives or my first week to be in 
Washington.
  The violence that occurred in this building yesterday is 
reprehensible and inexcusable. I am appalled by anyone who assaults our 
Nation's law enforcement officers.
  I swore an oath on Sunday to support and defend the Constitution of 
the United States. We are here today delayed, but not deterred, to 
debate a constitutional question and follow a constitutional process.
  The Constitution gives State legislators, not State executives or 
judges, the sole authority to determine how their State selects 
Presidential electors.
  Nobody disputes that in Pennsylvania, as well as in other States, 
rules and regulations were changed by executive fiat or judicial edict.
  These changes were significant and irregular. They included changes 
to vote-by-mail deadlines, identity verification requirements, and 
other ballot handling practices.
  In Pennsylvania specifically, the Democrat Secretary of the 
Commonwealth and the Democrat-controlled Pennsylvania Supreme Court 
usurped the constitutional authority of the State legislature.

                              {time}  0110

  Together, they exceeded their authority by extending the deadline for 
absentee ballots and by waiving signature requirements for those 
ballots.
  In their haste to make these changes, the secretary and the court 
created two different and unequal standards for voters. Pennsylvanians 
who chose to vote in person still had to have their signatures verified 
at their polling place, but those who chose to vote by mail did not. 
How is this process fair?
  This objection is about Pennsylvania, but it affects every State. As 
a State Representative of New Mexico, Pennsylvania's unconstitutional 
actions disenfranchised my constituents and the constituents of my 
colleagues. It is my duty to give my constituents a voice. Signing 
these objections raises their concerns to the fullest extent my office 
allows.
  I, again, condemn in the strongest terms the violence that took place 
here yesterday. We have many issues to solve, including reforms to 
restore all Americans' faith in the fairness of our elections. I look 
forward to those serious civil and peaceful debates.
  Madam Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Duncan).
  Mr. DUNCAN. Madam Speaker, this process we are going through today 
isn't about personalities. This isn't about Joe Biden or Donald Trump. 
As hard as some try to paint it that way, let me say that names and 
personalities don't matter. This is, gravely, about the Constitution of 
the United States.
  Almost 20 years ago, after the attacks on 9/11, Americans were 
persuaded to give up some of their constitutional liberties. Using the 
justification of that global crisis, the terrorist attacks on that 
fateful day, America saw the erosion of their liberties for the safety 
and security many felt they may receive through the USA PATRIOT Act and 
other resulting processes too many felt would keep us safe from another 
attack here on our shore.
  This year, using the justification of the global pandemic, COVID-19, 
we once again saw our Nation's Constitution violated. You see, the 
Constitution is clear in Article II, Madam Speaker, that the power and 
duty to set the manner of national elections rests solely with the 
State legislatures.
  That power doesn't rest with us. That power didn't rest in the hands 
of unelected county election officials, secretaries of state, or a 
supreme court but, rather, in the hands of the State legislatures, 
which pass laws setting the manner of elections held in their States.
  This year, using the extraordinary circumstance of the COVID-19 
pandemic, we witnessed these duly passed laws circumvented and usurped 
time and again, not by having the laws changed in the respective State 
legislative bodies, but those laws arbitrarily

[[Page H105]]

and unilaterally changed by county clerks; secretaries of state; and, 
in this case of Pennsylvania, an elected supreme court, which is 
supposed to interpret the law, not make law.
  When those nonlegislative entities change the laws without getting 
the general assemblies to change the law, in my opinion, the resulting 
ballots cast, either by mail or in person, those ballots were illegal 
under the law.
  Illegal ballots should not be counted. Therefore, the resulting 
electoral votes should be considered invalid.
  What bothers me is that so many of you are okay with that, that so 
many Americans, because their person won, you are okay with the manner 
in which that victory was gained.
  It is politics. Look, I get it. But we didn't swear an oath to play 
politics. We swore an oath to the United States Constitution. As George 
Washington said: The Constitution is the guide which I will never 
abandon.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Madam Speaker, first, I do want to acknowledge the 
devastating events of the last 12 hours and to express my deep 
appreciation for those who have worked to secure this building and 
safeguard our democracy. On behalf of my colleagues, we are all 
grateful for your service.
  I ran for this office on a platform of civility and decency, and many 
of my colleagues and constituents know that I am a third-generation 
veteran, and I grew up in a military household.

                              {time}  0120

  Madam Speaker, what you may not know, though, is that I grew up in a 
divided household. Throughout my childhood, one parent voted Democrat 
and the other Republican. In my purple household, I learned that duty 
to country was far more important than party allegiance. With each 
election, my father would say: ``And when the election is done, we 
salute smartly and we carry on.''
  Now I live in and I serve in a community that has a lot in common 
with the home that I grew up in. It, too, is a purple place that honors 
civility and decency. Pennsylvania's Sixth District is, in many ways, a 
microcosm of the Commonwealth and of our Nation. Our voter registration 
in Chester County is 40-40-20, R, D, and I. Voters across my district 
commonly split their ticket, some voting for President-elect Biden 
while also voting down the ballot for Republicans for our State 
legislature.
  What some of my colleagues are arguing today is that those very 
ballots are illegitimate. My colleagues cannot honestly believe that. 
In fact, just this week they joined me on the House floor to be sworn 
in to this hallowed body, and they trusted that the votes cast in their 
favor were legitimate. And they are right. If those votes counted, then 
so too must the votes for President-elect Biden.
  We have also heard today concerns about mail-in ballots. I am not a 
lawyer, but I am an engineer and, therefore, a student of numbers. It 
wasn't just Democrats who voted by mail. It was not a free-for-all, as 
it was described earlier. Madam Speaker, 600,000 Republicans in 
Pennsylvania across the State voted by mail. By questioning the 
election results, you are telling those Pennsylvanians that the hours 
they spent in line to cast their ballot or the trip they took to the 
post office in the middle of a pandemic just didn't matter.
  Alan Novak is a man who served as the chair of the Republican Party 
in Pennsylvania for nearly a decade. I will say that again. The Chair 
of the Republican Party of Pennsylvania for a decade is one of those 
voters I am talking about in Pennsylvania. He lives in my district, and 
he split his ticket. He voted for me as his Member of Congress and also 
for President Trump. And he eloquently said:

       What makes America great, exceptional, and enduring is our 
     commitment to our government of laws, our orderly 
     constitutional process that settles our election disputes, 
     and our peaceful transfer of power with respect and civility. 
     It is easy when it is pretty and the outcome is not 
     controversial. But when it is not pretty and there is 
     controversy, then it is even more important that we respect, 
     honor, and abide by our revered and tested process for the 
     orderly transfer of power. Perhaps that may be all that we 
     can agree on, and it is the need for grace, respect, and 
     civility.

  So I ask my colleagues across the aisle: Are you willing to 
disenfranchise people like Mr. Novak and the more than 400,000 people 
in Pennsylvania's Sixth District?
  Perhaps some of the independent and pragmatic spirit that is so 
prevalent among voters in my community comes from the history of the 
place that we call home. Many Americans have visited Philadelphia and 
our historic sites, but very few make it out to my community, which is 
the home of Valley Forge. Here, General George Washington led the 
Continental Army to winter quarters. The war had not been going well 
for our young soldiers, and that winter was harder still. It was 
bitterly cold, and food shortages and smallpox were abundant. Many 
people died.
  We remember what happened there because it was a test of our 
endurance, a demonstration of devotion to mission and to our country 
over ourselves. Coming out of that awful winter experience, our troops 
emerged better trained, united, and ultimately victorious. In those 
harsh, dark times, they found their common ground and their fortitude.
  Just like then, it is in these trying moments when we learn who our 
leaders truly are. They are the ones who don't just represent the 
people or give orders or ready us for a fight. They are those who 
educate and who speak truth. They inspire confidence and unity rather 
than sowing division and strife. There is a striking parallel between 
our nascent country and what they endured in Valley Forge and what we 
are enduring right now: A hard winter of division, illness running 
rampant, and an uncertain future.
  Today, our country's resolve is being tested, and I know that we will 
pass this test together and be made stronger. We now have the 
opportunity and the responsibility to do that tonight by upholding the 
will of the people, by voting to certify the results of this electoral 
college and by moving forward with a servant heart and a common resolve 
to preserve this great experiment that is the United States of America.
  Mr. BABIN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BABIN. It is with great pride and a profound sense of 
responsibility that I object to the 2020 election in the State of 
Pennsylvania.
  I am very proud to stand alongside fellow patriots who have pushed 
back against a fraudulent and criminal election process--a process that 
was the antithesis to the very rule of law that governs these United 
States.
  At the same time, standing here tonight is surreal because this is a 
critical juncture that will undoubtedly determine the survivability of 
this great Republic.
  Our free and fair election process--and by extension, the people's 
trust in its legitimacy--is what has separated us as a nation. A 
process that we have shared with the world, its moral force. A process 
that now, sadly, has been bastardized by those more interested in the 
maintenance of power than they are in the free and open voice of the 
American people.
  If I remember correctly, Democrats were calling for transparency in 
2000 and 2004, when George W. Bush was elected; and again in 2016, when 
President Trump took office.

  Where are you now?
  I ask this, Madam Speaker: What do you have to lose by having a 
thorough investigation to determine the validity of these votes?
  Why not encourage an investigation to relieve the concerns of half of 
the people in this country?
  If you are so convinced that Biden was elected legitimately, what do 
you have to fear?
  If there was no fraud, simply show us the proof. Investigate it. 
Validate it. This isn't about one candidate versus another. This is 
about upholding the principles that are indispensable to the existence 
of the democratic Republic that we are so fortunate to call home.
  I have no doubt that there was widespread election fraud this past 
November, and I am not alone. I stand here today speaking for 75 
million Americans whose voice was unconstitutionally silenced.

[[Page H106]]

  To you, the silenced, I say this: I will continue to fight for you. 
You have been heard. For more than 240 years, tyranny has sought to 
extinguish the light of freedom.
  As Ronald Reagan said before: Freedom is a fragile thing, and it is 
never more than one generation away from extinction.
  The Constitution and the Bible on which it stands is stronger than 
the cheap tyrannical tactics of those who seek to destroy it.
  Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. 
Budd).
  Mr. BUDD. Madam Speaker, mob violence is not representative of our 
country or of this building. The American people--at least the ones who 
are still up watching right now--have seen this body return to a 
peaceful debate. And that is the American way. So let's get back to 
that debate and let's talk for a moment about Pennsylvania.
  For decades, absentee voting was reserved for members of the military 
and citizens who are medically or physically unable to get to the 
polls. But in 2019, Pennsylvania dramatically increased the amount of 
ballots that would be cast in the Presidential election through 
expanded, no-excuse, mail-in voting.
  On September 17, Pennsylvania's Democrat-controlled Supreme Court 
violated the Constitution by extending the deadline to receive mail-in 
ballots. Article II states that legislatures, not the courts, determine 
the time, manner, and place of their States' elections. But 
Pennsylvania's high court directed the State officials to assume that 
non-postmarked ballots were received on time without any evidence that 
they were sent before election day.
  On October 23, while early voting was already underway, the State 
supreme court ruled that election officials did not have to 
authenticate signatures for mail-in ballots.
  To sum it up, Pennsylvania officials illegally did three critical 
things:
  One, they radically expanded vote by mail for virtually any reason.
  Two, they removed restrictions when a ballot can be sent in.
  Three, they removed signature verification on those very ballots.
  Just this week, the Pennsylvania Senate pleaded with Members of this 
body to delay certification until the Supreme Court resolves these 
disputes. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania violated their own 
constitution. They violated the U.S. Constitution. They opened the door 
for thousands of unverifiable ballots.
  Because they failed to guarantee the integrity of their votes, I 
cannot consent to accepting Pennsylvania's electoral votes.

                              {time}  0130

  Ms. DEAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the challenge.
  The SPEAKER. The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. DEAN. Madam Speaker, this is a sad day for America--a day of 
shame, a day of ignominy, an attack on this Capitol, an attack on our 
country.
  Madam Speaker, our words matter. Mobs, thugs, insurrectionists, 
domestic terrorists attacked our government with the aim of attacking 
our free and fair elections.
  Make no mistake, these terrorists came armed, armed with false flags; 
armed with hate; armed with weapons; and, tragically, armed with lies 
force-fed to them by those at the highest level of government, 
including some from the legislative and, yes, the executive branches. 
Incited by the one at the highest level of government, they attacked 
people, property, this Capitol, this cathedral of democracy.
  Words matter. In his last words to our Nation and to all of us here, 
our dear colleague, John Lewis, wrote last July: ``Democracy is not a 
state. It is an act.'' And each generation has an obligation to 
preserve its institutions.
  Democracy is a series of acts, acts by you and by me, by citizens, 
one building upon the other and another--not acts that we have heard 
and seen and suffered today, words and acts to incite violence, acts 
that tear at the very fabric of our democracy.
  Madam Speaker, yet, I have hope. We, too, are armed. We are armed 
with the facts. We are armed with the truth. We are armed with the love 
of our country. We are armed with our sworn oaths. And we are armed 
with our precious Constitution.
  We have faced tyranny and insurrection before. We are here tonight to 
herald to America and to the world: We will defend our democracy, and 
we will endure.
  Madam Speaker, when I came into work this morning, as I was preparing 
to come to the floor, I read Tom Friedman's op-ed, which began with the 
words from the Gospel of Mark: For what shall it profit a man if he 
gain the whole world but lose his soul?
  For what shall it profit any man.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my Republican colleagues to have the courage to 
uphold their oath, courage like that of Congresswoman Margaret Chase 
Smith, a lifelong Republican and the first in her party to speak out 
against McCarthyism. Putting duty over fear, she said: ``I do not want 
to see the Republican Party ride to political victory on the Four 
Horsemen of Calumny--Fear, Ignorance, Bigotry, and Smear. Surely, we 
Republicans are not that desperate for victory.''
  Madam Speaker, for today, we have seen the cost of victory by such 
means. It shook the very walls of this building. Our colleagues know 
there is no truth to this challenge.
  For what shall it profit a man.
  Madam Speaker, it has been my solemn honor to participate in this sad 
day. I pray for our country.
  Mrs. CAMMACK. Madam Speaker, I rise to support the objection of the 
electoral certification of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
  The SPEAKER. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. CAMMACK. Madam Speaker, as a new Representative here, I did not 
envision my first speech on the House floor to be this, here tonight, 
but rather, a tribute to our first responders and frontline workers who 
have been a shining light in an otherwise tough year for us all.
  After the events tonight, I am especially grateful for our men and 
women who put service above self, confronting lawlessness and danger 
while protecting this very Chamber, its Members, and our constitutional 
Republic.
  As a Member of the people's House, and the wife of a first responder, 
thank you to our law enforcement here today. But, especially, after 
tonight's unacceptable breach of the people's House, I am furthermore 
resolved in the fact that we, as representatives of the people, must 
take a stand for every American's right to a free and fair election as 
guaranteed by the Constitution.
  Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the Constitution explicitly rests 
the time and manner of our elections in the hands of our State 
legislatures. However, State law in the 2020 election was modified or 
circumvented without approval of the State legislature. These actions 
are in clear violation of the Constitution, specifically Article II, 
Section 1, Clause 2, which grants State legislatures the sole authority 
to establish how State Presidential electors are appointed.
  These changes, along with other election irregularities throughout 
the 2020 election, require me, as a Member of this body, to object to 
the certification of these electoral votes, just as my colleagues 
across the aisle have objected to every Republican Presidential 
election over the last 20 years.
  Tonight, as we undertake the very serious responsibility of debating 
these State electoral certifications, I urge my colleagues to listen 
earnestly and with an open mind, remembering that just 3 days ago, we 
swore an oath to the United States Constitution, not a political party.
  Our constituents are counting on us. Our country is counting on us. 
Our children are counting on us, and we cannot let them down.
  Madam Speaker, in December, 25 of my freshman colleagues and I sent 
you a letter imploring you to investigate these election 
irregularities. To date, we have not received a response. That brings 
us to today.
  My colleagues across the aisle have repeatedly invoked our Founding 
Father, Benjamin Franklin, who famously said: We have a republic, if we 
can keep it.
  I say, let's keep it.
  Madam Speaker, it is with that sentiment in mind that I ask my 
colleagues to defend the power vested in this legislative branch by the 
U.S. Constitution and reject the certification of the electoral votes 
of the State in question. It is our responsibility to have 

[[Page H107]]

courage in the face of adversity and bring integrity back to this 
process.

  Madam Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
the great State of Texas (Mr. Arrington).
  Mr. ARRINGTON. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from the great 
State of Florida (Mrs. Cammack), my friend.
  Madam Speaker, as Americans, we believe governments receive their 
just powers from the consent of the governed. That sacred transaction 
can only happen legitimately in a free and fair election.
  Election integrity is the very lifeblood of our unrivaled system of 
self-government. The law and the Constitution gave Congress not only 
the authority but, I believe, the responsibility to serve as the last 
check on the integrity of our Presidential elections. We either 
believe, according to statute, that every elector was ``lawfully 
certified'' and ``regularly given,'' or we don't.
  States certainly have broad delegated powers to administer Federal 
elections, but they still must operate within the bounds of the 
Constitution.
  Despite receiving numerous petitions--to the detriment of the 
country, I might add--the Supreme Court failed to answer the most 
important question of the 2020 election: Can entities outside of the 
State legislatures make election law?
  The plain language of Article II of the Constitution answers the 
question unequivocally no.
  The decisions made today in these Chambers are of the utmost 
consequence, and the horrible precedent that will be established if we 
don't act will have lasting impact on our beloved Republic.
  Madam Speaker, this proceeding is not just about the integrity of 
this election. It is about ensuring the integrity of all future 
elections.
  I take no pleasure or pride in making my objection today, nor do I 
wish for any State electors to be disqualified. However, based on the 
law, the Constitution, and my conscience, I cannot support certifying 
votes from any State that violated the Constitution.
  Madam Speaker, this decision is not about loyalty to a President. It 
is about my fidelity to the Constitution and the oath that I swore.
  Mr. LAMB. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LAMB. Madam Speaker, I came here tonight prepared to talk about 
the place I represent and how well the Democratic and Republican county 
officials ran our election. I wanted to point out that in my home 
county of Allegheny County, in the place they were counting the votes, 
there were 31 video cameras--31--in the same place, just showing people 
counting votes, every single one of them on paper, with representatives 
from both campaigns watching.
  Madam Speaker, I wanted to point out to all these great lovers and 
supporters of the Pennsylvania legislature that it was the Republican 
Pennsylvania legislature that passed a Republican bill that they all 
voted for and supported that set up the system under which we just ran 
the election, and that the reason the President lost was because he was 
not as popular as other Republicans in our State. He got fewer votes 
than all of them.
  Madam Speaker, I wanted to lay out all this evidence because I 
thought it was a sign of respect for my colleagues and for all the 
Americans out there who don't know who to trust. I was raised on that. 
I was raised on that respect, which makes this a hard speech for me to 
give. Because to do this with any kind of honesty means admitting and 
declaring in this House that these objections don't deserve an ounce of 
respect--not an ounce.

                              {time}  0140

  A woman died out there tonight, and you are making these objections.
  Let's be clear about what happened in this Chamber today. Invaders 
came in for the first time since the War of 1812. They desecrated these 
Halls and this Chamber and practically every inch of ground where we 
work. For the most part, they walked in here free. A lot of them walked 
out free. There wasn't a person watching at home who didn't know why 
that was--because of the way that they look.
  My point, Madam Speaker, is this: Enough has been done here already 
to try to strip this Congress of its dignity, and these objectors don't 
need to do anymore.
  We know that that attack today didn't materialize out of nowhere. It 
was inspired by lies, the same lies that you are hearing in this room 
tonight. And the Members who are repeating those lies should be ashamed 
of themselves. Their constituents should be ashamed of them.
  We know what is going to happen as soon as I walk away, what has 
happened all night tonight, what will continue to happen. They will 
take these same symbols, these same concepts, smuggle them into their 
arguments, and make the same arguments. I want people at home, anyone 
who is still watching, to know that these arguments are not for them; 
they are for you.
  None of the evidence we wanted to discuss here tonight will change 
their opinions or what they are about to say. But you need to know that 
is not the end. It is not as if there is nothing we can do because of 
that. And if there was, I don't think this Nation would have made it to 
almost 250 years.
  The fact is, Madam Speaker, that at the end of the day, people--


                             Point of Order

  Mr. GRIFFITH. Madam Speaker, point of order.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state his point of order.
  Mr. GRIFFITH. Yes, ma'am. The point of order would be that the 
gentleman said that there were lies on this floor here today, looking 
over in this direction. I ask that those words be taken down.
  We may have a disagreement on matters, but--
  The SPEAKER.
  The gentleman's demand is not timely.
  The gentleman from Pennsylvania will proceed.
  Mr. LAMB. Madam Speaker, the fact is, at the end of the day, it 
hurts. It hurts them; it hurts this country. It hurts all of us. But 
the fact is that the people have made this country work by not giving 
in.
  Go ahead. Shout it out.
  One last thing to say, Madam Speaker. And I thank you for your 
patience. All people need to know tonight, Madam Speaker--
  Madam Speaker, the truth hurts. But the fact is this: We want this 
government to work more than they want it to fail.
  After everything that has happened today, we want that more than 
ever. Know that. Know that, the people watching at home. We want this 
government to work. We will make it work. They will not make it fail.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. PERRY. Madam Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. PERRY. When is the appropriate time to ask that the words be 
stricken, be taken down?
  The SPEAKER. Immediately after the words are uttered.
  For what purpose does the gentleman from Louisiana seek recognition?
  Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the 
objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana. Madam Speaker, my, my, my. Let us take a 
deep breath, shall we?
  Madam Speaker, the cornerstone of the strength of our American 
Republic is not only the peaceful transition of power; it is the 
peaceful transition of a lawful power. It is within the parameters of 
our oath, indeed, is our duty to inquire if we suspect that perhaps our 
elections have been compromised.
  Much has been said about what we do not know. What we do not know 
calls for investigation.
  What we do know is that, in the disputed States, Governors, 
secretaries of state, or local election commissions acted in violation 
of the Election Clause of the U.S. Constitution, wherein State 
legislatures are granted the sole authority to determine how 
Presidential electors are appointed. It is that simple. State executive 
officials usurped the constitutionally vested authority of State 
legislatures within several of the sovereign States.
  Now, why we are involved in Congress? Because the Founders gave us a

[[Page H108]]

narrow role. If we suspect that an election was compromised in a 
sovereign State, then we have a role in the seating of those electors 
and the counting.
  America is not a confederacy of States. We are a union of States. We 
are a representative republic. Therefore, each sovereign State has a 
deep obligation to follow the writ of its own election law during a 
Federal election.
  We would not be having this conversation if our objections were 
solely rested upon the elections of sovereign State Governors or State 
senators and representatives. It is a Federal election for the 
President and Vice President of the United States. We certainly have a 
role, and we should investigate and support that role.
  Madam Speaker, America is an anointed nation, born of imperfect men 
driven by perfect intent. May we be worthy of what it is to be an 
American, what it is to be a representative of the American people.
  May I ask, may we seek the quiet whisper of God's own voice within 
us. And I ask my colleagues to consider supporting this objection.
  I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Van Drew).
  Mr. VAN DREW. Madam Speaker, before I start, something I didn't plan 
on saying. This is a debate. It is a discussion. Everybody has a right 
to an opinion. That is American. Because someone doesn't agree with 
your view or your ideas does not mean that they are liars. It means 
they have a different view, a different opinion.
  And I think, for God's sake, as people watch this or see it or hear 
it, they expect more from us than that. We can disagree at a certain 
level. There is nothing worse than moral pomposity.
  You know, today was an amazing and terrible day. But one thing that 
we do know is that our law enforcement protected lives, and they 
protected and preserved our democracy. I watched firsthand, as I always 
have, just as I do back home in south Jersey, these brave men and women 
put their lives on the line to defend all of us.
  May God bless the woman who lost her life today, and may God bless 
what will always be the greatest Nation in the history of the world: 
the United States of America.
  At the core of our country's greatness is our democratic system of 
government. Without faith in the integrity of our elections, Americans 
will not have faith in our democracy.
  The United States of America is the international embodiment of 
freedom and opportunity, the shining city on a hill. Free and fair 
elections have always been a hallmark of America's greatness.
  After this past Presidential election, approximately 60 million 
Americans have serious doubts about the outcome. That is a number that 
we cannot ignore.

                              {time}  0150

  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I started this day disheartened that our 
colleagues were going to drag us through this cynical political charade 
of objecting to duly certified electoral college votes, but I was ready 
and eager to defend Pennsylvania's elections and the will of 
Pennsylvania's voters.
  Never did I expect to be answering calls from family and friends 
concerned for my safety or to have to barricade myself in an office. 
But most important of all, never did I expect to see our Capitol 
overrun by armed insurrectionists intent on disrupting our government 
at the urging of the President.
  What happened here today has made me heart-sick for our country, but 
it only strengthens my resolve to uphold the rule of law and to protect 
the decision of Pennsylvania's voters.
  Earlier this week, we raised our hands and swore an oath to bear true 
faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States. But, 
today, those who are blocking the counting of electors from 
Pennsylvania are showing that their allegiance lies not to the 
Constitution or to their constituents, and many would argue not even to 
the Republican Party, but to their own political fortunes and the 
outgoing President.
  Pennsylvania's voters, not Members of Congress, are tasked with 
choosing Pennsylvania's Presidential electors, and particularly not 
congressmen from other States. The people have spoken, and Pennsylvania 
certified our electors. We must respect our oath here by rejecting this 
unfounded objection to Pennsylvania's electoral votes, and not 
substitute Congress' judgment for that of the people of Pennsylvania.
  Legal challenges to elections are serious matters, and that is why 
there is a place to consider those challenges: In courtrooms before 
impartial judges.
  And Pennsylvania's legal process has worked. The pseudo-legal 
arguments that are being raised by the objectors here today are not 
new. Over the past 2 months, the President and his allies have filed 
more than 20 lawsuits to challenge the Pennsylvania election. Those 
challenges have been rejected in Federal courts, State courts, 
appellate courts, and the United States Supreme Court. Challenges have 
been rejected by judges who are registered Democrats, Republicans, 
Independents, and who have been appointed by Democratic and Republican 
Presidents.
  And why did they lose all those cases?
  As Third Circuit Judge Bibas, a Trump appointee, wrote, ``Free, fair 
elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are 
serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges 
require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.''
  What the Court said points to an important distinction about when and 
how claims of election misconduct are made. It is easy to make wild 
claims of election fraud on cable television or Twitter, but those 
claims are not facts. And while there may be no immediate consequences 
for misleading the public with such statements, there is certainly a 
penalty for misleading the courts.
  A lawyer faces fines, jail, and loss of his or her license for making 
frivolous or false claims. The lawyers for the Trump campaign never 
alleged widespread fraud or illegal voting had impacted Pennsylvania's 
elections because those claims are false.
  When our colleagues indulge in this political theatre and endorse 
fringe conspiracy theories, they may think there are no consequences 
because they know that this time the majorities of the House and Senate 
will overrule them. But as the entire world saw today, their baseless 
claims of election fraud do have consequences. They undermine faith and 
respect for our elections and our government. They chip away at the 
foundation of our constitutional Republic and they take a sledgehammer 
to the peaceful transfer of power. It is our job to respect the rule of 
law and reject this political charade.
  Finally, I want to offer my deepest respect to our Republican 
colleagues in both the House and the Senate who have withstood intense 
political pressure, and today honor their oath in the rule of law by 
rejecting these unfounded objections.
  Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in favor of the 
objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Madam Speaker, I would first like to say to my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle who said we should be ashamed 
over here, I am not ashamed, and neither are my colleagues over here. 
We are actually proud of what we are doing and what we are standing 
for. So I hope the Record will show that.
  Yesterday's cowardly attack on our American democracy was a horrible 
act. While Congress attempted to execute their constitutional duty to 
debate and vote on this certification of the electoral college, 
violence interrupted the proceedings in an attempt to stop the 
democratic process.
  Those who committed these acts are domestic terrorists and should be 
prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And I thank the Capitol 
Police and all of the law enforcement organizations that pushed back 
against this mob.
  I can't help but be reminded of the bravery during the baseball 
shooting on myself and my Republican colleagues in June of 2017. I 
thank God every day for their presence.
  The American people deserve full transparency in the electoral 
process, with confidence that any irregularities and inconsistencies in 
that process will be fully investigated.
  As a former Texas secretary of state, I know the electoral process 
well. And

[[Page H109]]

above all, I know what the courts, the executive branch, and the 
elections officials can and cannot do without approval of the State 
legislature. During my tenure, I knew that my authority was confined to 
the powers the legislature provided me. If States fail to abide by the 
Constitution and follow their owns laws, it calls into question whether 
the votes in Texas, or any other State, are fairly represented.

  And now, as a duly elected Member of Congress, the Constitution 
outlines my rights to speak and voice my constituents' concerns with my 
vote. It is pivotal that we have free and fair elections in our 
representative democracy and, more importantly, that we trust in the 
results of those elections.
  In no way is voicing an objection an attempt to overturn an election. 
And when this process is complete and all objections have been heard, I 
acknowledge that we will have a peaceful transfer of power on January 
20.
  Faith in our system must be restored and Americans must be confident 
that their vote matters, and only lawful votes will be counted. This is 
a sad day in our Nation's history, but a solemn reminder that our 
country will not falter and will not fail. In God we trust.
  Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. 
Cawthorn).
  Mr. CAWTHORN. Madam Speaker, as I said in my convention speech, I 
want a new generation of Americans to be radicals--to be radicals for 
freedom and for liberty, but not radicals for violence. I am bitterly 
disappointed by the protest that happened yesterday. The actions of a 
violent few were cowardly and pathetic, and I am not afraid to call it 
out.
  The Republican Party is a party of limited government. It is the big 
tent party. It is not the party of destruction.
  Madam Speaker, the oath I took just days ago demand that I speak out 
in defense not of one President or another, but in defense of a 
hallowed document that has safeguarded this Republic for over 200 
years. The Constitution grants power solely to State legislatures to 
determine how elections are carried out. When other officials who are 
not vested with constitutional authority usurp their role and grind the 
Constitution under their heel, I must object.

                              {time}  0200

  Our Nation is a nation of resilience. In Valley Forge, George 
Washington prayed for a republic to be formed from the ashes of a 
monarchy. At Gettysburg, Americans gave their lives to defend a very 
simple idea, that the American democracy that had been earned with the 
blood of their forefathers would not perish due to internal division.
  Then, on the islands of Iwo Jima and Okinawa, American servicemen 
gave their lives to defend this Nation's freedom from fascism.
  What unites each and every generation of Americans is the idea that 
those who submit themselves to the authority of government ought to 
have a voice in that same government.
  We are Americans here in this Chamber and in this country. But what 
does it really mean to be an American? It means believing in the rule 
of law. It means speaking up in defense of our founding principles and 
in defense of the Constitution.
  Being an American means that you are proud of your country but that 
you never beat your chest. And being an American means that sometimes 
you must stand alone while others sit.
  Now, obviously, I can't stand, but trust me, if I could stand, I 
would stand in defense of our Constitution today.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Speaker, I completely agree with my colleague 
Representative Dwight Evans, and I remind this Chamber that 
Pennsylvania is the cradle of American democracy.
  We can't claim to be the birthplace of American democracy. That would 
be a disservice to James Otis, Jr., who, in 1761, stood up in a 
Massachusetts courtroom and argued against the King's writs of 
assistance.
  But Pennsylvania is the cradle of democracy. It is where we hosted 
the signing of the Declaration of Independence and the American 
Constitution.
  It was Pennsylvanians who immediately went to battle to defend this 
idea of democracy. They went right after Bunker Hill to the Siege of 
Boston. American riflemen were instrumental at the transformational 
Battles of Trenton and Saratoga in victory. And it is Independence Hall 
where these documents got signed, the Declaration of Independence and 
the Constitution.
  You heard my colleagues. You heard Representative Houlahan talking 
about the privations at Valley Forge, all in support of creating 
democracy.
  You heard Representative Brendan F. Boyle quoting John Adams, that 
democracy only dies by suicide.
  You heard Representative Dean quoting John Lewis, our hero, who said: 
Democracy is not a state. It is an act.
  You heard Representative Wild talking about this stunning assault on 
our democracy.
  If it seems like we get a little prickly in Pennsylvania about 
assaulting democracy, you are right. We do. Pennsylvania is the cradle 
of democracy.
  You heard how foolish and empty these challenges are. Representative 
Lamb said it: 31 cameras filming the place where the count was 
happening, resulting in thousands of hours of videotape--you can see it 
on YouTube--proving there was no fraud.
  You heard Representatives Michael F. Doyle and Brendan F. Boyle 
talking about Act 77, how the Republicans in Pennsylvania were falling 
all over themselves to pass this law for mail-in voting because they 
thought it would help them.
  You heard Representative Scanlon explaining why there were no 
allegations of fraud made in court because a lawyer going into court 
and lying to the court gets his or her ticket to practice law punched. 
They can be disbarred.
  Politicians can say anything on cable TV, but they have to be darn 
careful when they are in court. So all these big TV talkers never 
alleged fraud in court.
  Let me tell you about one court case. It was a case where they 
brought on their best legal talent. It was a case where they drew as a 
judge a staunch, principled, conservative Republican, Judge Matthew 
Brann. He called this case ``strained legal arguments without merit'' 
and ``speculative accusations.'' He called it ``like Frankenstein's 
monster,'' a ``haphazardly stitched together'' case.
  Judge Brann said he ``has no authority to take away the right to vote 
of even a single person, let alone millions of citizens.''
  On appeal Judge Bibas, a Trump appointee writing for the Third 
Circuit, agreed. He said: ``Calling an election unfair does not make it 
so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have 
neither here.''
  So, we have judges--dozens and dozens of them, Federal judges, State 
judges, Democrats, Republicans--turning away these challenges. All they 
ever wanted was evidence.
  Here is the number-one rule when you go to court: Don't forget to 
bring the evidence with you.
  This objection, in all seriousness, reflects the most profound 
disrespect to our American judiciary. We Pennsylvanians understand 
democracy. It was in Pennsylvania that our Founders signed the 
Constitution, and Article II makes it plain as day: We elect our 
President. We don't have a king.
  If you can undo a Presidential election simply by alleging that 
something was amiss, then we don't have a democracy at all. We have 
something else entirely.
  And if we vote to sustain this objection, we are not upholding our 
Constitution at all. We are doing something else entirely.
  Let's vote ``no'' on this objection.
  Mr. DAVIDSON. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DAVIDSON. Madam Speaker, every one of us swore an oath to support 
and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, 
both foreign and domestic.



 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  January 6, 2021, on page H109, the following appeared: Mr. 
DAVIDSON of Ohio. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this 
objection. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 
5 minutes. Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Madam Speaker, every one of us 
swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United 
States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic.
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: Mr. DAVIDSON. 
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this objection. The SPEAKER. 
The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. DAVIDSON. 
Madam Speaker, every one of us swore an oath to support and defend 
the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, both 
foreign and domestic.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 


 I swore that oath in uniform, and the first part of that oath is the 
  same as what we swear here in Congress.The last time we needed to 
defend our Constitution against a domestic

[[Page H110]]

enemy, we fought a civil war. And at the conclusion of that Civil War 
we passed the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments that make clear that no 
State is so sovereign that they can deprive their citizens of equal 
protection of the laws.
  When it comes to elections, that means one person gets one vote. It 
doesn't mean that other citizens can dilute the votes of other citizens 
and deprive them of equal protection. And it doesn't mean that a State 
can do that by law or by practice.
  So whether the law was changed and made it such that there is no way 
to provide equal protection--one person, one vote--or the practice was 
corrupted, it cannot stand. Frankly, lastly, it must guarantee that 
there is a proof that it was equal protection under the law.
  None of that happened in a number of States. The people of America, 
tens of millions of them who came out to vote, have been unheard by 
this body and by far too many courts. We need to show them the respect 
they are due by the Constitution of the United States of America, the 
Constitution that we fought to sustain to end the era of Jim Crow to 
pass civil rights legislation, the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights 
Act, and so many other pieces of jurisprudence.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DAVIDSON. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  January 6, 2021, on page H110, the following appeared: Mr. 
DAVIDSON of Ohio. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: Mr. DAVIDSON. I 
yield to the gentleman from Ohio.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 


  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman needs to maintain his position 
and control of the time.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this 
objection and to give voice to the 249,386 men and women of Ohio's 
Sixth Congressional District who have had their voices silenced by the 
rogue political actors in Pennsylvania who unilaterally and 
unconstitutionally altered voting methods to benefit the Democratic 
candidate for President.
  Secretaries of state and State supreme courts cannot simply ignore 
the rules governing elections set forth in the Constitution. They 
cannot choose to usurp their state legislatures to achieve a partisan 
end, Constitution be damned.
  Madam Speaker, this is a sad day for America. We have seen too many 
sad days like this recently: assaults on courthouses, police stations, 
and now the U.S. Capitol. People who disagree with the results of 
police work and court decisions are wrong to respond violently. And 
people who disagree with the results of an election are also wrong to 
respond with violence. Thank you to the Capitol Police and all the law 
enforcement involved for protecting the people's House today.
  Madam Speaker, some may question our motives for raising these 
objections, but other than the Bible, our Constitution is the most 
sacred document known to man because it created the most free and 
prosperous nation in human history.

                              {time}  0210

  2021 has the chance to be remembered for when the leaders of a deeply 
divided America came together to defend that sacred document and to 
ensure that the integrity of future Presidential elections is ensured. 
It is imperative we take this opportunity. The future of our Republic 
depends on it.
  Benjamin Franklin, in the summer of 1787, during the heated debate to 
create our sacred Constitution, said these famous words: ``I have lived 
long, sir, a long time . . . and the longer I live, the more convincing 
proofs I see of this truth . . . that God governs in the affairs of 
men.
  ``And, if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is 
it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been 
assured, sir, in the sacred writing that `Except the Lord build it, 
they labor in vain that build it.' ''
  Madam Speaker, I pray that we would turn to the God Almighty that 
ordained our Nation into being to help us in our time of need.
  Mr. KINZINGER. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KINZINGER. Madam Speaker, as a student of foreign policy, if 
somebody described to me the actions that we saw, I would have assumed 
we were in a failed nation or a banana republic. Storming past police, 
some carrying the flag of the Confederacy, the mob breached this House.
  But there is good news: The democracy held today.
  For the last few years, misinformation and fear has been fed into 
people for profit and power, and for too many years, leaders around the 
country said nothing and sometimes echoed those messages because of the 
belief that winning, no matter the cost, was worth everything.
  Today, we saw the result of ignoring these warning signs.
  People look to Washington to give hope. Instead, we simply amplify 
fears.
  People look to us for expertise on what can and can't be possible. 
Sometimes it is easier to say what makes people feel good instead of 
the hard facts.
  Today, some Members of Congress argue that we can unilaterally pick 
the next President, that with our glorious wisdom, armed with Twitter, 
we know better than the American people. Some have shown that, if 
conspiracies are repeated enough, they become facts and they aren't 
disputed.
  Even here in this Chamber after the events today, some speeches have 
been shockingly tone-deaf. I have seen people applaud cheap political 
lines that are embarrassing.
  Power and cultural fights have divided us so much that they are the 
ultimate goal now, and sometimes the oath we swear to uphold feels like 
a prop.
  People have been lied to by too many for too long.
  So here is the truth: Joe Biden won this election, the effort will 
fail, and everybody knows it.
  For some out there, this isn't about making a statement for the 
betterment of our country; it is about avoiding the pain of leveling 
with the people and telling them the truth: the emperor has no clothes.
  I know many are disappointed in the result, but what legacy are we 
leaving? Have our kids seen the day where Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill 
had a beer over their differences, or have they learned that to lead, 
you must tweet, and sometimes all in caps, because now this is 
Hollywood, fame is the ultimate goal?
  But the first step that we can take to restore this is to reject the 
charade, and what happens next is up to us.
  We get threatened with primaries; we worry about the political 
implications. But our names will long be forgotten; the legacy of now 
will exist.
  The bottom line: If we ask men and women to be willing to give their 
lives for this Nation and we talk about their service with tears in our 
eyes, shouldn't we be willing to give up our jobs to uphold that 
Constitution?
  Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. 
Herrera Beutler).
  Ms. HERRERA BEUTLER. Madam Speaker, is this a country, is this an 
America that we want to give to our children, a country of lawlessness, 
of might makes right, of mob rule?
  Previous generations of Americans have laid down their lives to 
answer ``no'' to that question. I do not want to be the first 
generation of Americans so selfish as to answer ``yes.'' Nothing is 
more important to me than preserving this constitutional Republic as a 
Representative.
  Article II of the Constitution states: ``Each State shall appoint, in 
such manner as the legislature thereof may direct, a number of 
electors,'' meaning that it is the duty of the State legislatures to 
select their electors in a manner they stipulate. It is right here.
  The Founders of our Republic did not want to federalize elections, 
which is why they reserved the selection of electors to the State 
legislatures.
  Historically, when Congress intervened in the electoral process, it 
was in the Civil War. It was when States were sending multiple slates 
of electors. But that is not the case today.
  Of the six States actively being contested, five have Republican 
legislatures; five are controlled by one party; five have the authority 
to get together and to vote to change the elector that they sent to us.
  How many of the six did? Not one.
  Pennsylvania did not get together and vote as a body and send us a 
new slate of electors. They did not send us a bill or a resolution 
citing injustice at the State level.
  None of them.
  Are they cowards? Do they not know the Constitution? Have they not 
read

[[Page H111]]

it, like you and I? Or are they merely passing the buck?
  Here is the reality. Look, I believe this was not a fraud-free 
election. I believe that there were problems in Pennsylvania and in 
Georgia. But the Constitution gives us the right to fix that at the 
State level, not throw out the electoral college. We do not want to 
absolve the responsibility of the people in those States to hold their 
own lawmakers accountable.

  I, as a Washington State Congresswoman, don't know better than the 
people in Pennsylvania and Georgia.
  Folks, we can't vote to undermine the electoral college today. We 
have to uphold it.
  Mr. POSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the objection.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. POSEY. Madam Speaker, as you have heard from both sides of the 
aisle over and over and over today and tonight, Members of Congress 
take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution.
  Clearly, the Constitution says State legislatures make voting laws, 
period, end of subject. And, clearly, in Pennsylvania and some other 
States, nonlegislators changed those voting laws.
  No matter who wins or who loses, those are violations of the 
Constitution whether you, me, or anyone else likes it or not.
  As Congressman Davidson pointed out, over a dozen FBI agents were 
immediately dispatched to fully investigate Bubba Wallace's garage 
door. But, sadly, the FBI never responded to my request to investigate 
massive voting irregularity accusations, like the video footage from 
Georgia that we all wished we didn't see.
  Neither has the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of 
State, the Postal Inspector General, the Director of National 
Intelligence, the CIA, and, saddest of all, the U.S. Department of 
Justice.
  The right to vote is not only a constitutional right, it is also a 
civil right, and we must protect it. Running a fair and transparent 
election is not something America should run away from. It is something 
we must live up to.
  Every eligible American has a right to have their vote counted and 
the right to feel confident that his or her vote was counted, not 
neutralized by an illegal vote.

                              {time}  0220

  Otherwise, I fear our Republic is doomed. That is why I implore you 
to support a full investigation.
  Madam Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the fine gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).
  Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, this has been an 
interesting day. And I know we want to debate this, and we brought up 
all kinds of things, all kinds of points of history and what happened 
and where it happened and all the rest of this, and we are very, very 
grateful to the Capitol Police and all those who came in to protect us.
  But the real debate right now about Pennsylvania is Pennsylvania's 
Act 77. Was it constitutional or was it unconstitutional? All the rest 
of the trimmings you can set aside and just decide: Was it 
constitutional or unconstitutional?
  Act 77 changed Pennsylvania's voting law and Pennsylvania's 
Constitution.
  Now, Pennsylvania could change that law, but it is done through an 
amendment to the constitution. It is not just done because somebody 
would like to see that done.
  We had a mail ballot that was available. It was an absentee ballot. 
We did not have a no-excuse ballot.
  What did Pennsylvania have to do to get to the point where they would 
have a no-excuse mail-in ballot?
  Number one, in two successive sessions of the Pennsylvania 
Legislature, that had to be passed in that legislation, one session 
after the other. If it passed both times, then it had to be published 
in every one of the 67 counties of Pennsylvania, twice. When that was 
finished, it then had to go before the Pennsylvania voters to decide 
whether they wanted the constitution amended.
  Pennsylvania did the first one. They actually did take a vote, and it 
was overwhelming. But then they scrapped it, and they put it in an 
omnibus bill. That is an unconstitutional change. You cannot do it. It 
is that simple.
  So I love the idea about Washington crossing the Delaware. I love the 
idea about Washington going through a terrible winter.
  I hate the idea of what we had to go through today. But if oaths 
don't matter, and we have all taken them, and if the Constitution 
doesn't matter, why do we even do it? Why go through this charade that 
somehow we are really close friends, except when it comes to the really 
important things?
  We have driven this country apart through the people's House, and we 
wonder what happened?
  The biggest loss on November 3 was not by Donald Trump; it was the 
faith and trust that the American people lost in this voting system 
because we have allowed it to happen. It is unconstitutional.
  Mr. SCHIFF. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition.
  The SPEAKER. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SCHIFF. Madam Speaker, 80 years ago today, Franklin Roosevelt 
delivered his third inaugural address. ``Every realist knows,'' he 
said, ``that the democratic way of life at this moment is being 
directly assailed in every part of the world--assailed either by arms, 
or by the secret spreading of poisonous propaganda by those who would 
seek to destroy unity and promote discord in nations still at peace.''
  Today, the principal threat to our democracy comes from a different 
but also poisonous propaganda of those who seek to destroy our unity 
and promote discord.
  According to this propaganda, America cannot conduct a free or fair 
election. Our elections are rigged and doomed.
  According to this propaganda, the voters can no longer decide who 
shall be President. The Congress must decide for them.
  At a time when our Nation faces an unprecedented health crisis, with 
thousands dying every day, with Americans struggling to put food on the 
table and keep a roof over their head, who are we to say that the man 
America chose to lead us out of this calamity shall not take office?
  The coronavirus will claim more American lives than all of the 
casualties in World War II. To meet that moment will require unity, not 
discord; will require an abiding faith in our country, in our 
democracy, in our government's ability to function and provide for the 
needs of its citizens.
  The Members of this body cannot continue to challenge the merits of 
an election that was fairly conducted and overwhelmingly won by Joe 
Biden. It must stop.
  Look at the damage that was wrought in this House today, to this 
country today. Is that not enough?
  Roosevelt said: ``This Nation has placed its destiny in the hands and 
heads and hearts of its millions of free men and women. . . . Our 
strength,'' he concluded ``is our unity of purpose.''
  Let us unite once again in defense of the greatest hope of freedom-
loving people around the world, this precious democracy.
  Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin).
  Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, the baseless attack on Pennsylvania and 
its electors brought to mind, for me, the great Tom Paine, the champion 
of popular democracy, who came over to America to fight with us in the 
Revolution against the king. He lived in Philadelphia, where he wrote 
``Common Sense'' and ``The Age of Reason.'' And Paine said: In the 
monarchies, the king is the law; but in the democracies, the law will 
be king.
  When you think about it, the peaceful transfer of power is the 
central condition of maintaining democracy under the rule of law. That 
is why the famous election of 1801 was such a big deal.
  When John Adams relinquished the Presidency to his passionate 
adversary and lifelong friend Thomas Jefferson, it was the first 
peaceful transition of power between democracies in a democratic 
republic in the history of the world.
  And he said, as he rode back to Massachusetts from Washington, Adams 
said that he did this because we are a government of laws and not of 
men. We will betray this principle if we trade a government of laws for 
a government of men or, even worse, a single man, or an impressionable 
and dangerous mob

[[Page H112]]

intent on violent sedition and insurrection against our beloved 
democratic Republic.

  Here is Abraham Lincoln right before the war. At what point, then, is 
the approach of danger to be expected? I would answer, if it ever 
reaches us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. 
If destruction be our lot, we must, ourselves, be its author and its 
finisher.
  Madam Speaker, my family suffered an unspeakable trauma on New Year's 
Eve a week ago. But mine was not the only family to suffer such 
terrible pain in 2020. Hundreds of thousands of families in America are 
still mourning their family members. Many families represented in the 
Congress are still mourning their family members who have been taken 
away from us by COVID-19, by the opioid crisis, by cancer, by gun 
violence, by the rising fatalities associated with the crisis in mental 
and emotional health.
  Enough, my beloved colleagues. It is time for America to heal. It is 
time for our families and communities to come together. Let us stop 
pouring salt in the wounds of America for no reason at all. Let us 
start healing our beloved land and our wonderful people.
  The SPEAKER. All time for debate has expired.
  The question is, Shall the objection submitted by the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) and the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Hawley) be 
agreed to.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas 
and nays.
  The SPEAKER. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 8, the yeas 
and nays are ordered.
  Members are reminded to vote when their group is called and to leave 
the Chamber after they have voted.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 138, 
nays 282, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 11]

                               YEAS--138

     Aderholt
     Allen
     Arrington
     Babin
     Baird
     Banks
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice (OK)
     Biggs
     Bishop (NC)
     Boebert
     Bost
     Brooks
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cawthorn
     Chabot
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Crawford
     Davidson
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Estes
     Fallon
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fleischmann
     Foxx
     Franklin, C. Scott
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Garcia (CA)
     Gibbs
     Gimenez
     Gohmert
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Greene (GA)
     Griffith
     Guest
     Hagedorn
     Harris
     Harshbarger
     Hartzler
     Hern
     Herrell
     Hice (GA)
     Higgins (LA)
     Hudson
     Issa
     Jackson
     Jacobs (NY)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Jordan
     Joyce (PA)
     Keller
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kustoff
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lesko
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Malliotakis
     Mann
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McClain
     Meuser
     Miller (IL)
     Miller (WV)
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Mullin
     Murphy (NC)
     Nehls
     Norman
     Nunes
     Obernolte
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pence
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Posey
     Reschenthaler
     Rice (SC)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rose
     Rosendale
     Rouzer
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Sessions
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Steube
     Stewart
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Walberg
     Walorski
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wright
     Zeldin

                               NAYS--282

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Allred
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Auchincloss
     Axne
     Bacon
     Balderson
     Barr
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bourdeaux
     Bowman
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brown
     Brownley
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Bush
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson
     Cartwright
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Cheney
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Comer
     Connolly
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Craig
     Crenshaw
     Crist
     Crow
     Cuellar
     Curtis
     Davids (KS)
     Davis, Danny K.
     Davis, Rodney
     Dean
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Delgado
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Emmer
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fletcher
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel, Lois
     Fudge
     Gallagher
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garbarino
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Golden
     Gomez
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Gonzalez, Vicente
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al (TX)
     Grijalva
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Haaland
     Harder (CA)
     Hayes
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins (NY)
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinson
     Hollingsworth
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Huizenga
     Jackson Lee
     Jacobs (CA)
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson (TX)
     Jones
     Kahele
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim (CA)
     Kim (NJ)
     Kind
     Kinzinger
     Kirkpatrick
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster
     LaHood
     Lamb
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latta
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Leger Fernandez
     Levin (CA)
     Levin (MI)
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Luria
     Lynch
     Mace
     Malinowski
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Manning
     Massie
     Matsui
     McBath
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meijer
     Meng
     Mfume
     Miller-Meeks
     Moolenaar
     Moore (UT)
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Newhouse
     Newman
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reed
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rodgers (WA)
     Ross
     Roy
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Simpson
     Sires
     Slotkin
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Spanberger
     Spartz
     Speier
     Stanton
     Stauber
     Steil
     Stevens
     Stivers
     Strickland
     Suozzi
     Swalwell
     Takano
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Torres (NY)
     Trahan
     Turner
     Underwood
     Upton
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Wagner
     Waltz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Wexton
     Wild
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)
     Womack
     Yarmuth
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bilirakis
     Brady
     Buck
     Granger
     Hastings
     Joyce (OH)
     LaTurner
     Scott, David
     Steel
     Tlaib
     Trone

                              {time}  0308

  Ms. Clarke of New York changed her vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the objection was not agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  The SPEAKER. The Clerk will now notify the Senate of the action of 
the House, informing that body that the House is now ready to proceed 
in joint session with the further counting of the electoral vote for 
the President and Vice President.


                    FURTHER MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE



 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  January 6, 2021, on page H112, the following appeared: The 
SPEAKER. The Clerk will now notify the Senate of the action of the 
House, informing that body that the House is now ready to proceed 
in joint session with the further counting of the electoral vote 
for the President and Vice President.

                          --------------


                    FURTHER MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

  
  The online version has been corrected to delete the Bodoni dash 
and reset the header following the Bodoni dash as a small cap 
title.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 


  A further message from the Senate by Ms. Byrd, one of its clerks, 
announced that the Secretary of the Senate shall inform the House of 
Representatives that the Senate is ready to proceed in joint session 
with the further counting of the electoral votes for President and Vice 
President.

  (By unanimous consent, Mr. Hoyer was allowed to speak out of order.)


                         Honoring Shuwanza Goff

  Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, this would not be the time I would have 
chosen, but it may be the last time that we are in session before the 
new administration comes in.
  We are losing an extraordinary young woman who has been with me for 
over a decade and who is our floor leader, our floor director. All of 
you know her. Her name is Shuwanza Goff, and she has been with me for a 
significant period of time.
  Shuwanza is a wonderful person. And the problem with having 
wonderful, talented, good staff is that at an administration change, 
they steal your people. It is just a terrible thing that happens. Two 
of my staff, Shuwanza Goff and Mariel Saez, will be going to the 
administration as well, and I have asked the administration to please 
do not take any more of my people.
  But Shuwanza Goff has just been extraordinary. Those of you who have 
dealt with her understand how bright she is.

[[Page H113]]

  That is the bad news, Madam Speaker, that they have taken her. But 
the good news is, she is going to be the administration's 
representative to the House of Representatives, so we are going to see 
a lot of Shuwanza. I am sure she will be talking to both of us on both 
sides of the aisle and urging us to vote one way or the other or 
getting us information or doing all sorts of things that we might ask 
her to do and that she would want to do for us.
  I want to say, Madam Speaker, and I know you share my view, those of 
us who have had an opportunity to work closely with Shuwanza, I love 
Shuwanza Goff. She is just a wonderful spirit. She is smart. She knows 
the rules. She knows the floor. I think Mr. McCarthy's and Mr. 
Scalise's staffs would say the same thing if I had given them any 
notice that we were going to do this, but I thought we had some time.
  Shuwanza, I really do want to thank you, and we wish you the best of 
luck. We know you are not going far. I know we are going to see a lot 
of you, but we wish you great success in everything you do.
  I tell my staff, Madam Speaker, that they can go off the payroll, but 
they cannot go off the staff.
  God bless, Shuwanza, and good luck.

                              {time}  0322

  At 3:22 a.m., the Sergeant at Arms, Paul D. Irving, announced the 
Vice President and the Senate of the United States.
  The Senate entered the Hall of the House of Representatives, headed 
by the Vice President and the Secretary of the Senate, the Members and 
officers of the House rising to receive them.
  The Vice President took his seat as the Presiding Officer of the 
joint convention of the two Houses, the Speaker of the House occupying 
the chair on his left. Senators took seats to the right of the rostrum 
as prescribed by law.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. The joint session of Congress to count the 
electoral vote will resume. The tellers will take their chairs.
  The two Houses retired to consider separately and decide upon the 
vote of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, to which an objection has 
been filed.
  The Secretary of the Senate will report the action of the Senate.
  The Secretary of the Senate read the order of the Senate, as follows:

       Ordered, That the Senate by a vote of 7 ayes to 92 nays 
     rejects the objection to the electoral votes cast in the 
     Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for Joseph R. Biden, Jr., for 
     President and Kamala D. Harris for Vice President.

  The VICE PRESIDENT. The Clerk of the House will report the action of 
the House.
  The Clerk of the House read the order of the House, as follows:

       Ordered, That the House of Representatives rejects the 
     objection to the electoral vote of the Commonwealth of 
     Pennsylvania.

  The VICE PRESIDENT. Pursuant to the law, chapter 1 of title 3, United 
States Code, because the two Houses have not sustained the objection, 
the original certificate submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 
will be counted as provided therein.
  The tellers will now record and announce the vote of the State of 
Rhode Island for President and Vice President in accordance with the 
action of the two Houses.
  This certificate from Rhode Island, the Parliamentarian has advised 
me, is the only certificate of vote from that State that purports to be 
a return from the State and that has annexed to it a certificate from 
an authority of that State purporting to appoint and ascertain 
electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of Rhode Island seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 4 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 4 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of Rhode Island that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from South 
Carolina, the Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate 
of vote from that State that purports to be a return from the State and 
that has annexed to it a certificate from an authority of that State 
purporting to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of South Carolina seems to be regular in 
form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of 
the State of Florida received 9 votes for President and Michael R. 
Pence of the State of Indiana received 9 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of South Carolina that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from South Dakota, 
the Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote 
from that State that purports to be a return from the State and that 
has annexed to it a certificate from an authority of that State 
purporting to appoint and ascertain electors.
  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the State of South Dakota seems to be regular in form and authentic, 
and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida 
received 3 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of 
Indiana received 3 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of vote of the State of South Dakota that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  0330

  The VICE PRESIDENT. This certificate from Tennessee, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of electoral 
vote from the State that purports to be a return from the State and 
that has annexed to it a certificate of an authority of that State 
purporting to appoint or ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of 
the State of Tennessee seems to be regular in form and authentic, and 
it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida 
received 11 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of 
Indiana received 11 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote of the State of Tennessee that the teller has 
verified as regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Texas, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
the State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate of an authority of that State that purports 
to appoint or ascertain electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of Texas seems to be regular in form and authentic, 
and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida 
received 38 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of 
Indiana received 38 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote of the State of Texas that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Utah, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate of an authority from the State purporting 
to appoint or ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of ILLINOIS. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of Utah seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State 
of Florida received 6 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the 
State of Indiana received 6 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote of the State of Utah

[[Page H114]]

that the teller has verified to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Vermont, the 
Parliamentarian has advised me, is the only certificate of vote from 
the State that purports to be a return from the State and that has 
annexed to it a certificate of an authority from that State purporting 
to appoint or ascertain electors.
  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the State of Vermont seems to be regular in form and authentic, and 
it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of 
Delaware received 3 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris of the 
State of California received 3 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote of the State of Vermont that the teller has 
verified as regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from the 
Commonwealth of Virginia, the Parliamentarian has advised, is the only 
certificate of vote from that State that purports to be a return from 
the State and that has annexed to it a certificate of an authority from 
that same State purporting to appoint or ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of 
the Commonwealth of Virginia seems to be in regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 13 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 13 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote of the Commonwealth of Virginia that the teller 
has verified as appearing regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Washington, 
the Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of vote from 
that State that purports to be a return from the State and that has a 
certificate of an authority from the same State purporting to appoint 
or ascertain electors.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral 
vote of the State of Washington seems to be regular in form and 
authentic, and it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the 
State of Delaware received 12 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris 
of the State of California received 12 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote of the State of Washington that the teller has 
verified and appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from West 
Virginia, the Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate of 
vote from that State that purports to be a return from the State and 
that has annexed to it a certificate of an authority from the State 
purporting to appoint or ascertain electors.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of ILLINOIS. Mr. President, the certificate of the 
electoral vote of the State of West Virginia seems to be regular in 
form and authentic, and it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of 
the State of Florida received 5 votes for President and Michael R. 
Pence of the State of Indiana received 5 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting the 
certificate of the vote for the State of West Virginia that the teller 
has verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, this certificate from Wisconsin, 
the Parliamentarian has advised, is the only certificate from that 
State that purports to be a return from the State and that has annexed 
to it a certificate of an authority from the State purporting to 
appoint or ascertain electors.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote of 
the State of Wisconsin seems to be regular in form and authentic, and 
it appears therefrom that Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of 
Delaware received 10 votes for President and Kamala D. Harris of the 
State of California received 10 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. For what purpose does the gentleman from Texas 
rise?
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. President, I object to the electoral votes of the 
State of Wisconsin because 71 House Members, all of who condemn 
violence as we witnessed today, are firmly committed to the resolution 
of disagreements in civil, lawful, peaceful institutions with full and 
fair debate, free of violence. And though not a single court has 
allowed an evidentiary hearing to listen to the significant body of 
evidence of fraud, and though some seize on the court's failure to 
misrepresent that no court would listen to the evidence as saying 
evidence did not exist; while Democrat leaders in Milwaukee illegally 
and unconstitutionally created more than 200 illegal polling places; 
tens of thousands of votes were changed by workers, despite election 
workers' objections, plus so many other illegalities to fraudulently 
create a 20,000-vote lead, we object, along with a Senator who now has 
withdrawn his objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Sections 15 and 17 of title 3 of the United 
States Code require that any objection be presented in writing, signed 
by a Member of the House of Representatives and a Senator.
  Is the objection in writing and signed by a Member and a Senator?
  Mr. GOHMERT. It is in writing. It is signed by a Member, but it is 
not signed and objected to by a Senator, Mr. President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. In that case, the objection cannot be 
entertained.
  This certificate from Wyoming, the Parliamentarian has advised, is 
the only certificate of vote from that State and purports to be a 
return from the State and has annexed to it the certificate of an 
authority from the same State purporting to appoint or ascertain 
electors.
  Senator BLUNT. Mr. President, the certificate of the electoral vote 
of the State of Wyoming seems to be regular in form and authentic, and 
it appears therefrom that Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida 
received 3 votes for President and Michael R. Pence of the State of 
Indiana received 3 votes for Vice President.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Are there any objections to counting a 
certificate of the vote of the State of Wyoming that the teller has 
verified appears to be regular in form and authentic?
  There was no objection.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. Hearing none, the Chair advises Members of 
Congress the certificates having been read, the tellers will ascertain 
and deliver the result to the President of the Senate.
  Senator KLOBUCHAR. The undersigned, Roy Blunt and Amy Klobuchar, 
tellers on the part of the Senate; Zoe Lofgren and Rodney Davis, 
tellers on the part of the House of Representatives, report the 
following as the result of the ascertainment and counting of the 
electoral votes for President and Vice President of the United States 
for the term beginning on the 20th day of January, 2021. The report we 
make is that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris will be the President and the 
Vice President, according to the ballots that have been given to us.
  The tellers delivered to the President of the Senate the following 
statement of results:


 JOINT SESSION OF CONGRESS FOR THE COUNTING OF THE ELECTORAL VOTES FOR 
   PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES--OFFICIAL TALLY

  The undersigned, Roy Blunt and Amy Klobuchar tellers on the part of 
the Senate, Zoe Lofgren and Rodney Davis tellers on the part of the 
House of Representatives, report the following as the result of the 
ascertainment and counting of the electoral vote for President and Vice 
President of the United States for the term beginning on the twentieth 
day of January, two thousand and twenty one.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  For President      For Vice President
                             -------------------------------------------
  Electoral votes  of each    Joseph R.
            State               Biden,   Donald J.  Kamala D.   Michael
                                 Jr.       Trump      Harris    R. Pence
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama--9..................  .........          9  .........          9
Alaska--3...................  .........          3  .........          3
Arizona--11.................         11  .........         11  .........
Arkansas--6.................  .........          6  .........          6

[[Page H115]]

 
California--55..............         55  .........         55  .........
Colorado--9.................          9  .........          9  .........
Connecticut--7..............          7  .........          7  .........
Delaware--3.................          3  .........          3  .........
District of Columbia--3.....          3  .........          3  .........
Florida--29.................  .........         29  .........         29
Georgia--16.................         16  .........         16  .........
Hawaii--4...................          4  .........          4  .........
Idaho--4....................  .........          4  .........          4
Illinois--20................         20  .........         20  .........
Indiana--11.................  .........         11  .........         11
Iowa--6.....................  .........          6  .........          6
Kansas--6...................  .........          6  .........          6
Kentucky--8.................  .........          8  .........          8
Louisiana--8................  .........          8  .........          8
Maine--4....................          3          1          3          1
Maryland--10................         10  .........         10  .........
Massachusetts--11...........         11  .........         11  .........
Michigan--16................         16  .........         16  .........
Minnesota--10...............         10  .........         10  .........
Mississippi--6..............  .........          6  .........          6
Missouri--10................  .........         10  .........         10
Montana--3..................  .........          3  .........          3
Nebraska--5.................          1          4          1          4
Nevada--6...................          6  .........          6  .........
New Hampshire--4............          4  .........          4  .........
New Jersey--14..............         14  .........         14  .........
New Mexico--5...............          5  .........          5  .........
New York--29................         29  .........         29  .........
North Carolina--15..........  .........         15  .........         15
North Dakota--3.............  .........          3  .........          3
Ohio--18....................  .........         18  .........         18
Oklahoma--7.................  .........          7  .........          7
Oregon--7...................          7  .........          7  .........
Pennsylvania--20............         20  .........         20  .........
Rhode Island--4.............          4  .........          4  .........
South Carolina--9...........  .........          9  .........          9
South Dakota--3.............  .........          3  .........          3
Tennessee--11...............  .........         11  .........         11
Texas--38...................  .........         38  .........         38
Utah--6.....................  .........          6  .........          6
Vermont--3..................          3  .........          3  .........
Virginia--13................         13  .........         13  .........
Washington--12..............         12  .........         12  .........
West Virginia--5............  .........          5  .........          5
Wisconsin--10...............         10  .........         10  .........
Wyoming--3..................  .........          3  .........          3
    Total--538..............        306        232        306        232
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Roy Blunt,
     Amy Klobuchar,
       Tellers on the part of the Senate.
     Zoe Lofgren,
     Rodney Davis,
       Tellers on the part of the House of Representatives.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. The state of the vote for President of the United 
States, as delivered to the President of the Senate, is as follows:
  The whole number of the electors appointed to vote for President of 
the United States is 538, of which a majority is 270.
  Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the state of Delaware, has received for 
President of the United States 306 votes;
  Donald J. Trump, of the state of Florida, has received 232 votes;
  The state of the vote for Vice President of the United States, as 
delivered to the President of the Senate, is as follows:
  The whole number of the electors appointed to vote for Vice President 
of the United States is 538, of which a majority is 270.
  Kamala D. Harris, of the state of California, has received for Vice 
President of the United States 306 votes;
  Michael R. Pence, of the state of Indiana, has received 232 votes.
  This announcement of the state of the vote by the President of the 
Senate shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons elected 
President and Vice President of the United States, each for the term 
beginning on the twentieth day of January, two thousand and twenty one, 
and shall be entered, together with the list of the votes, on the 
Journals of the Senate and House of Representatives.

                              {time}  0340

  The VICE PRESIDENT. The whole number of electors appointed to vote 
for President of the United States is 538. Within that whole number, a 
majority is 270.
  The votes for President of the United States are as follows:
  Joseph R. Biden, Jr., of the State of Delaware has received 306 
votes.
  Donald J. Trump of the State of Florida has received 232 votes.
  The whole number of electors appointed to vote for Vice President of 
the United States is 538. Within that whole number, a majority is 270.
  The votes for Vice President of the United States are as follows:
  Kamala D. Harris of the State of California has received 306 votes.
  Michael R. Pence of the State of Indiana has received 232 votes.
  This announcement of the state of the vote by the President of the 
Senate shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons elected 
President and Vice President of the United States, each for the term 
beginning on the 20th day of January, 2021, and shall be entered, 
together with the list of the votes, on the Journals of the Senate and 
House of Representatives.
  The Chair now recognizes for the purpose of a closing prayer the 62nd 
Chaplain of the United States Senate, Chaplain Barry C. Black.
  Chaplain BLACK. Lord of our lives and sovereign of our beloved 
Nation, we deplore the desecration of the United States Capitol 
Building, the shedding of innocent blood, the loss of life, and the 
quagmire of dysfunction that threaten our democracy.
  These tragedies have reminded us that words matter and that the power 
of life and death is in the tongue. We have been warned that eternal 
vigilance continues to be freedom's price.
  Lord, You have helped us remember that we need to see in each other a 
common humanity that reflects Your image. You have strengthened our 
resolve to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States 
against all enemies domestic, as well as foreign.
  Use us to bring healing and unity to a hurting and divided Nation and 
world. Thank You for what You have blessed our lawmakers to accomplish 
in spite of threats to liberty.
  Bless and keep us. Drive far from us all wrong desires, incline our 
hearts to do Your will, and guide our feet on the path of peace. And 
God bless America.
  We pray in Your sovereign name.
  Amen.
  The VICE PRESIDENT. The purpose of the joint session having 
concluded, pursuant to Senate Concurrent Resolution 1, 117th Congress, 
the Chair declares the joint session dissolved.
  (Thereupon, at 3 o'clock and 44 minutes a.m., the joint session of 
the two Houses of Congress was dissolved.)
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Jackson Lee). Pursuant to Senate 
Concurrent Resolution 1, the electoral vote will be spread at large 
upon the Journal.

                          ____________________