[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 104 (Tuesday, June 15, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4533-S4534]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       FOR THE PEOPLE ACT OF 2021

  Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, the Democrats want to call their voting 
bill the For the People Act, but I would suggest you not be fooled by 
the marketing. This bill has nothing to offer the people of our 
country. The so-called For the People Act is, in fact, a partisan 
takeover of our elections that seeks a government of the Democrats, by 
the Democrats, and for the Democrats. So it is no wonder that it is 
their very top priority and it is literally the first bill filed in 
both the House and the Senate this year.
  If this bill passes, it will shatter our Nation's faith in the 
fairness of our democracy, weaken the security of our elections, and 
attempt to entrench Democratic rule in the swamp, unchallenged, for 
decades to come.
  S. 1 is a Federal takeover of our elections that would usurp the 
constitutional prerogative of the States in determining what the 
Constitution calls the ``Times, Places, and Manners of holding 
elections.'' While our Constitution has always given Congress the power 
to determine certain aspects of how elections are conducted, the 
Founders envisioned that this power would be exercised, in the words of 
Alexander Hamilton, only under ``extraordinary circumstances'' and only 
as ``the last resort.'' For example, Congress could intervene if States 
were simply refusing to hold Federal elections in an attempt to deprive 
Congress of the Members needed to operate under the quorum rules of the 
Constitution. Of course, we face no such extraordinary circumstances 
today.
  No matter the outrageous claims of hysterical journalists and 
politicians, almost every story you hear and every Democratic claim you 
hear about State election law reforms misrepresents those reforms or 
doesn't put them in proper context.
  The Democratic Party--the very head of the Democratic Party, 
President Joe Biden, referred to Georgia's election reform, for 
instance, as a ``new Jim Crow,'' even though it has far, far more 
access to the ballot than Democratic-run States like New York and, yes, 
Joe Biden's own Delaware.
  I might also note that Kentucky passed a fairly sweeping election 
reform bill earlier this year. It still doesn't go as far as Georgia's 
bill did in providing early access to the ballot. Yet there is no 
condemnation of Kentucky's bill. I wonder why. Could it be because 
Kentucky has a Democratic Governor?
  The Democrats want to use these kinds of misrepresentations to pass 
S. 1, which would give all power over our Nation's elections to 
Democrats in Congress, who think anyone should be able to vote, at any 
time, at any place, and in any manner, with remarkably little concern 
even for the basics of election integrity, such as establishing the 
identity and the legality of individuals who are casting the ballots.
  The bill before the Senate would invalidate voter identification laws 
in States across the country--laws that simply require individuals to 
present valid photo identification in order to vote. Now, Democrats 
like to pretend that voter ID laws are racist, just as they like to 
pretend that anyone who opposes them is also racist. That would be a 
surprise to most of the American people, though. According to recent 
polling, three-quarters of Americans support photo ID requirements, 
including 70 percent of Black voters, who support photo ID 
requirements. That is a pretty big claim of false consciousness by the 
Democrats.
  After all, it is no great burden to present a driver's license or 
photo identification at the polling place in order to vote. It is not 
some devious tactic to suppress any group of voters. If it was, maybe 
we would need to ask some of these politically correct airlines, like 
Delta, why they require passengers to present photo identification 
before boarding flights. Are they engaged in some nefarious, racist 
practice of traveler suppression? I don't think so.
  I think voter ID laws are a basic means of securing the vote, just 
like three-quarters of all Americans think. Yet S. 1 would still 
eliminate them all, allowing anyone to register to vote, under any 
identity, without presenting proof that they are who they claim to be.
  The Democrats' bill would also make permanent many of the vote-by-
mail expansions that were rushed through as ill-considered emergency 
measures during the pandemic last year. The free-for-all of ballot 
harvesting and mail-in voting during the 2020 elections caused many 
Americans to doubt the integrity of that vote.
  Removing guardrails against fraud will only convince more voters that 
the electoral process is rigged. Responsible elected officials should 
be trying to assuage voters' fears by implementing adequate safeguards 
on our elections. After all, many of these practices were unheard of 
before the 2020 election.
  Now, the Democrats like to say that they have to pass S. 1 in a 
response to these State election reforms, but I would point out that 
this bill was introduced in the House 2 years ago, before the States 
passed any of the election reforms. Oftentimes these State election 
reforms are being passed by legislatures that were appalled by their 
Governor's sweeping power grabs. So no matter what the conditions, the 
Democrats think it is always time to nationalize our elections.
  Another provision of the Democrats' election bill would repeal donor 
privacy laws that keep the IRS from harassing nonprofit organizations 
about the identities and addresses of their donors. Democrats claim 
that this change is about dark-money mega donors, but it would apply to 
any middle-class family who donates a few hundred dollars a year to a 
cause they care about, like a church or a charity. Yet, if the 
Democrats have their way, bureaucrats at the IRS would be able to force 
nonprofits to name their donors or risk losing their tax-exempt status. 
This should alarm anyone familiar with the IRS's track record of 
unfairly targeting conservative groups. After all, just last week, we 
saw a conveniently timed leak of legally protected tax returns that 
came out right before the Senate Finance Committee had a meeting to 
justify higher taxes. What a coincidence.
  Now, these are just a few of the proposals in the Democrats' election 
bill. I haven't even talked about the public funding of campaigns. I 
haven't mentioned transforming the Federal Election Commission into a 
partisan weapon to be used by the President's party against the 
opposition. All of these provisions and many more encourage fraud, 
harassment, and corruption in our campaigns and elections. Not 
coincidentally, they all seem to work to the advantage of the Democrats 
or at least to the Democrats' perceived self-advantage. It is little 
surprise, then, that this partisan bill is supported only by 
Democrats--not even all Democrats, for that matter, not all the 
Democrats here in the Senate and not all the Democrats in the House, 
which passed it earlier this year by the thinnest of margins.
  So I am proud to be a part of the bipartisan majority in the Senate 
that is opposing the Democratic Party's attempted takeover of our 
States' election processes. Political office in America is not a 
birthright of any party or any politician, so the Democrats should try 
winning their elections fair and square instead of taking them over in 
a centralizing power play.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana is recognized

[[Page S4534]]

  

                          ____________________