[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 24, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Page S837]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                                Protests

  Now, Mr. President, on a completely different matter, I have been 
outspoken and clear about the crimes that were committed here on 
January 6. In my discussions with Judge Garland, the President's 
nominee to be Attorney General, I specifically raised the need to 
continue investigating and prosecuting anyone who broke the law that 
day. I am glad he has repeatedly emphasized this would remain a 
priority. Everyone agrees that day's events must occasion a serious and 
thorough review of the specific institutions and security procedures 
within Congress that proved so insufficient. That process is already 
underway as we saw with the joint hearing conducted yesterday by two 
Senate committees.
  The Speaker of the House proposes even more investigation through a 
new commission. She cites the precedent of the 9/11 Commission, but her 
draft bill fails to track with that precedent in key ways.
  The 9/11 Commission was intentionally built to be bipartisan. The 50-
50 bipartisan split of the commissioners was a key feature. It both 
helped the effectiveness of the investigation itself and helped give 
the whole country confidence in its work and its recommendations. This 
time, however, Speaker Pelosi started by proposing a commission that 
would be partisan by design--seven appointments for Democrats, just 
four for Republicans. The 9/11 Commission also built consensus by 
requiring bipartisan support for subpoenas. The Speaker's bill would 
vest subpoena power in one appointee chosen by the Democrats.
  Both the Democratic and Republican leaders of the 9/11 Commission are 
speaking out against this bizarrely partisan concept. Let me say that 
again. The leaders of the 9/11 Commission--one Republican, one 
Democrat--are speaking out against the way this proposal is crafted by 
the Speaker.
  Lee Hamilton, the Democratic Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission, 
says:

       That does not sound to me like a good start; it sounds like 
     a partisan beginning.

  That was the Democratic Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission.
  Tom Kean, the Republican Chairman, pointed out what should be 
obvious:

       Unless you have equal representation . . . the report won't 
     have as much confidence from the American people.

  Any undertaking along these lines needs to be fair and needs to be 
evenhanded. That really shouldn't be controversial, and it goes beyond 
just a makeup of the panel.
  For example, the Speaker's proposal imagines something more than an 
investigation into the specific security failures that occurred here at 
the Capitol. It sets the stage for a somewhat broader inquiry into 
``domestic violent extremism'' beyond just that day, but the partisan 
panel would get to decide which other incidents are and are not 
``relevant.''
  Rioting and political violence are abhorrent and unacceptable no 
matter what cause the mob is advancing. These are not forms of 
political speech. For almost a year now, we have seen political 
violence and riots become an increasingly normalized phenomenon across 
our national life. None of us should accept that.
  January 6 was uniquely grave because the intent was to interrupt the 
constitutional duty of Congress, but if this new commission is to go 
beyond a targeted, after-action analysis of the security failures here 
at the Capitol complex and if Congress is going to attempt some broader 
analysis of toxic political violence across the country, then, in that 
case, we cannot have an artificial cherry-picking of which terrible 
behavior does and which terrible behavior does not deserve scrutiny. We 
could do something narrow that looks at the Capitol or we could 
potentially do something broader to analyze the full scope of the 
political violence here in our country. We cannot land at some 
artificial, politicized halfway point.
  Don't take it from me. Take it from the Democratic and Republican 
leaders of the 9/11 Commission. An inquiry with a hard-wired partisan 
slant would never be legitimate in the eyes of the American people. An 
undertaking that is uneven or unjust would not help our country
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The assistant majority leader.