Analilia Mejia, NJ
Linked statement
“President Trump fired the leaders of the agency that protects our elections because they would not make it harder for people to vote. He is also spreading false claims about voter fraud to push a bill that stops millions of citizens from registering. Congress must pass new laws to protect our elections from the president. We must also reform the Supreme Court.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today with urgency. Weeks ago, President Trump fired every remaining Commissioner of the Federal agency charged with protecting the integrity of our elections. This Chamber has not reckoned with that fully, and it should. The Election Assistance Commission exists to help carry out free and fair elections in this country. It was structured by law with four bipartisan members precisely so that no single administration could control how our elections are run. That structure is the point. For over a year, this administration pressed that very Commission to require a passport or original birth certificate as a condition for voter registration. Millions of Americans do not have ready access to either document. The Commission would not act on this demand, and the courts agreed. Both checks held. Then, days after the Supreme Court granted the President new authority to remove the heads of independent agencies in a case that had nothing to do with elections, the President used that very authority in order to eliminate every Commissioner. This was not incidental. It was the removal of the officials standing between this President and a policy his own Commission and the courts have rejected. Last Thursday night, he took his case to national television. In a prime-time address from the White House, the President declassified documents he claimed proved foreign interference and widespread fraud in the election he lost over 5 years ago. He alleged a foreign government has compromised the voter data of 220 million Americans and that 278,000 noncitizens were registered to vote. Independent fact checkers, who reviewed those very documents, found that they did not support the claim made about them. He presented no evidence of a single fraudulent vote because 5 years and 64 court cases have never produced even one. This Chamber has now watched the same pattern twice: raise unproven claims of fraud, then use them to justify removing the very safeguards standing in the way; first the Commissioners and now a prime-time address built to manufacture support for legislation his own party could not pass on its merits, the SAVE Act. House Republicans have pushed it through, and Senate Republicans have tried repeatedly to force it through as a reconciliation amendment, needing only a simple majority, only to see it blocked each and every time. Under this bill, a driver’s license does not satisfy the registration requirement. Only a passport, an original birth certificate, or naturalization papers would. Consider what that means: 146 million Americans do not hold a valid passport, and roughly 69 million married women hold birth certificates that no longer match their legal names. When Kansas tried a version of this requirement, 31,000 eligible citizens, 12 percent of all applicants, were blocked from registering--not noncitizens, citizens. Mr. Speaker, this has never been a matter of election integrity. It is a matter of who holds power in this country and who is permitted to participate in choosing it. When a party grows uncertain it could win on the merits, the next move is rarely to accept that outcome. It is to lay the groundwork in advance so any unfavorable results can be dismissed before a single vote is counted. This Chamber should be prepared to say clearly every time that surfaces that this is not a defense of democracy. It is a preview of what happens if this administration does not like what voters decide. Congress has an obligation to respond. We must enact durable, statutory protections for the administration of Federal elections so that no single official can dismantle them by executive action. We must pursue meaningful reform of the Supreme Court, including term limits and enforceable ethical standards because a Court that keeps expanding this President’s authority is not exercising oversight. It is, in fact, removing it. Each of these actions taken individually may appear isolated. Taken together, however, they constitute a sustained effort to narrow the American electorate at the exact moment this country is apt to render judgment on this administration. I will not treat this as acceptable, and I will not stop opposing it.”
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with urgency. Weeks ago, President Trump fired every remaining Commissioner of the Federal agency charged with protecting the integrity of our elections. This Chamber has not reckoned with that fully, and it should. The Election Assistance Commission exists to help carry out free and fair elections in this country. It was structured by law with four bipartisan members precisely so that no single administration could control how our elections are run. That structure is the point. For over a year, this administration pressed that very Commission to require a passport or original birth certificate as a condition for voter registration. Millions of Americans do not have ready access to either document. The Commission would not act on this demand, and the courts agreed. Both checks held. Then, days after the Supreme Court granted the President new authority to remove the heads of independent agencies in a case that had nothing to do with elections, the President used that very authority in order to eliminate every Commissioner. This was not incidental. It was the removal of the officials standing between this President and a policy his own Commission and the courts have rejected. Last Thursday night, he took his case to national television. In a prime-time address from the White House, the President declassified documents he claimed proved foreign interference and widespread fraud in the election he lost over 5 years ago. He alleged a foreign government has compromised the voter data of 220 million Americans and that 278,000 noncitizens were registered to vote. Independent fact checkers, who reviewed those very documents, found that they did not support the claim made about them. He presented no evidence of a single fraudulent vote because 5 years and 64 court cases have never produced even one. This Chamber has now watched the same pattern twice: raise unproven claims of fraud, then use them to justify removing the very safeguards standing in the way; first the Commissioners and now a prime-time address built to manufacture support for legislation his own party could not pass on its merits, the SAVE Act. House Republicans have pushed it through, and Senate Republicans have tried repeatedly to force it through as a reconciliation amendment, needing only a simple majority, only to see it blocked each and every time. Under this bill, a driver’s license does not satisfy the registration requirement. Only a passport, an original birth certificate, or naturalization papers would. Consider what that means: 146 million Americans do not hold a valid passport, and roughly 69 million married women hold birth certificates that no longer match their legal names. When Kansas tried a version of this requirement, 31,000 eligible citizens, 12 percent of all applicants, were blocked from registering--not noncitizens, citizens. Mr. Speaker, this has never been a matter of election integrity. It is a matter of who holds power in this country and who is permitted to participate in choosing it. When a party grows uncertain it could win on the merits, the next move is rarely to accept that outcome. It is to lay the groundwork in advance so any unfavorable results can be dismissed before a single vote is counted. This Chamber should be prepared to say clearly every time that surfaces that this is not a defense of democracy. It is a preview of what happens if this administration does not like what voters decide. Congress has an obligation to respond. We must enact durable, statutory protections for the administration of Federal elections so that no single official can dismantle them by executive action. We must pursue meaningful reform of the Supreme Court, including term limits and enforceable ethical standards because a Court that keeps expanding this President’s authority is not exercising oversight. It is, in fact, removing it. Each of these actions taken individually may appear isolated. Taken together, however, they constitute a sustained effort to narrow the American electorate at the exact moment this country is apt to render judgment on this administration. I will not treat this as acceptable, and I will not stop opposing it.