[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 162 (Tuesday, October 3, 2023)]
[House]
[Page H4959]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     CONGRATULATING LAPHONZA BUTLER

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Kiley) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, first, I extend my wishes and prayers to the 
family of Senator Feinstein. Dianne Feinstein dedicated her life to 
public service, and her passing is a profound loss for our State and 
country.
  I also congratulate Laphonza Butler on her appointment to the Senate 
by Governor Newsom, and I say that with all sincerity. I harbor no ill 
will in any form against Ms. Butler. She apparently wasn't even 
expecting this appointment and only learned about it when she got a 
call from the Governor, and she agreed to serve. She should be 
commended for that.
  I should say that there has been raised a question concerning whether 
she meets the requirements to hold this office and to represent 
California, given that apparently she is a registered voter in 
Maryland. I trust that the Senate, which is responsible for judging the 
qualifications of its Members, is taking that inquiry seriously.
  I will say, however, that we need to, at this point, kind of pause to 
reflect on the fact that if Ms. Butler is sworn in, which I believe she 
is supposed to be sworn in today, California will now have two Senators 
who gained their office not by the authority of voters but, rather, by 
the whim of a single individual, Governor Gavin Newsom. We will have 
two Senators who gained their office via appointment.

                              {time}  1100

  We also, by the way, have a Senator from New Jersey whose own 
conference is calling on him to resign, which could create another 
appointed Senator in the United States Senate.
  This is very much contrary to the spirit of the 17th Amendment, which 
calls for the direct election of Senators. When this amendment was 
adopted, it was put in place, according to one scholarly article, to 
replace a distrusted aristocratic regime of appointed Senators with one 
of popular enfranchisement.
  Indeed, since the 17th Amendment, which provided for the direct 
election of Senators but allowed that governors could appoint Senators 
still to fill vacancies, these appointments have been subject to all 
manner of abuses. You have had instances of nepotism. Governors have 
appointed their children. They have appointed their spouses. Some have 
even appointed themselves to the U.S. Senate. Indeed, the appointment 
that Governor Newsom has just made demonstrates the risks that are 
inherent in an appointment system.
  As one headline in today's San Francisco Chronicle reads: ``Newsom's 
handling of Feinstein's replacement was a highlight reel of his 
political flaws.'' The writer says that he twisted himself into 
rhetorical pretzels over the last 2 years because he looked at this 
appointment through the lens of what is going to help his Presidential 
aspirations as opposed to what is going to be best for the State of 
California.
  As long as 2 years ago, Governor Newsom made statements about who he 
might appoint in the event of a vacancy. Then just a few weeks ago, he 
said he was going to appoint an interim Senator. Then a couple days 
ago, he walked back that statement and said, no, the person would be 
free to run for reelection.
  This is just not the sort of dynamic that ought to influence who is 
going to hold a position as important as being the United States 
Senator from California.
  I should also add that it is quite unfair to the candidates who have 
been running to hold this position in 2024, three of whom currently 
serve in the House, who have been very actively campaigning and now 
face the prospect of running against an incumbent who didn't actually 
have to get to that office and face voters in order to get there.
  For this House, the House of Representatives, every single person who 
walks onto the floor of this House is there by the authority of voters, 
is there having been elected. There is no reason why it shouldn't be 
the same in the United States Senate.
  I have introduced H. Res. 57. This is a constitutional amendment that 
will simply say that in order to be a United States Senator, just as to 
be a United States Representative, you have to get there by an election 
of the people. If this really is a government of, by, and for the 
people, as Lincoln put it, then we should make sure that those who are 
here at this Capitol making important decisions on behalf of the people 
are there because the people chose them to be so.

                          ____________________