[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 7, 2023)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E104]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




OPPOSITION OF H.J. RES. 24--DISAPPROVING THE ACTION OF THE DISTRICT OF 
    COLUMBIA COUNCIL IN APPROVING THE LOCAL RESIDENT VOTING RIGHTS 
                         AMENDMENT ACT OF 2022

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, February 7, 2023

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.J. 
Res. 24--Disapproving the action of the District of Columbia Council in 
approving the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022.
  H.J. Res. 24 will overturn the Local Resident Voting Act of 2022, a 
measure passed by will of the people in the District of Columbia 
Council.
  This overreaching resolution seeks to overturn the will of Washington 
DC people, who voted to support the rights of noncitizens who fulfill 
residency and other requirements to vote in district local elections 
under the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022.
  Let the record be clear, Mr. Speaker, the United States Constitution 
does not forbid noncitizens from casting their vote In local, state, or 
federal elections.
  At least 15 cities currently allow non-citizens to cast ballots in 
local elections.
  While voting in federal elections was made illegal for noncitizens in 
1996, the legal voting of noncitizens in American elections has a long 
history in this nation.
  Noncitizens were occasionally permitted to cast ballots in local, 
state, and federal elections in 40 states from the time of the nation's 
inception until 1926.
  During the early years, the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801 
granted Congress sole power over the district's boundaries, depriving 
its citizens of the voting privileges they had previously enjoyed as 
residents of Maryland and Virginia.
  Due to its treatment as a U.S. territory rather than a state, the 
District of Columbia has no voting representation in Congress and is 
certainly not given its fair amount of federal funding--despite the 
fact that Washington DC residents pay more federal taxes per person 
than citizens of any other state, and more than residents of 22 states 
combined.
  It is no secret that when politicians seek to suppress voting rights, 
the feared component of increased racial political power rears its ugly 
head in driving and motivating shifts in laws that will eliminate or 
stunt the political growth of minority populations in America.
  As we stand here today, marking the first week of Black History 
Month, we must acknowledge that we are standing in a building built by 
the hands of slaves, and we are standing in a city that is not only one 
of the most diverse cities in the country, but is also home to one of 
the largest Black populations--yes, Washington, DC--our nation's 
capital.
  The underrepresentation of Blacks and minorities in our nation's 
capital and in our national democratic systems is a shameful stain on 
our morals and values as Americans.
  We must put an end to current and historical voter suppression and we 
must stop pushing oppressive and systemically racist policies if we are 
ever to truly be a nation united by our democratic pillars and 
principles.
  The nearly 700,000 D.C. residents, a majority of whom are Black and 
Brown, are worthy and capable of self-government.
  And Congress, which is not accountable to D.C. residents, should not 
interfere with legislation duly enacted by the duly elected D.C. 
government.
  Members of Congress should not substitute their policy judgment for 
the judgment of D.C.'s elected officials.
  Quite simply, Congress should keep its hands off D.C.
  The legislative history and merits of the two bills enacted by D.C. 
that are the subject of the disapproval resolutions--the Revised 
Criminal Code Act and the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act--
should be irrelevant to the consideration of these disapproval 
resolutions, since there is never justification for Congress nullifying 
legislation enacted by D.C.
  That being said, we need to set the record straight on these two 
bills enacted by D.C.
  Under the D.C. Home Rule Act, which was passed by Congress, D.C.'s 
legislature, the 13-member D.C. Council, is required to pass 
legislation twice, with at least 13 intervening days between each vote, 
to enact legislation.
  Legislation passed by the Council and signed by the D.C. mayor (or 
with a veto override or without the mayor's signature) is transmitted 
to Congress for a review period.
  The legislation takes effect at the expiration of a review period, 
unless a resolution of disapproval is enacted into law during the 
review period.
  And yet, the House did not hold a hearing or markup on either 
disapproval resolution.
  This resolution cannot stand as a serious policy measure to be 
respected on the floors of this chamber, and must be opposed.