# Congressional Record/Volume 167/Issue 4/Extensions of Remarks/Objecting to Certain Electoral Votes

OBJECTING TO CERTAIN ELECTORAL VOTES
HON. RANDY K. WEBER, SR. OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 6, 2021
Mr. Weber of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today to voice my concerns regarding the irregularities and improprieties in the 2020 General Election. As I have said time and time again, the American people deserve to have full faith in our elections. The numerous votes cast by mail this year—due to the pandemic—have been plagued by allegations of fraud and wrongdoing. I watched with great concern as President Trump’s legal team brought forth witnesses, sworn affidavits, and reams of legitimate evidence to courts in various states. There are countless, incontestable examples wherein governors, election officials, and judges altered states’ election procedures in clear violation of Article II of the U.S. Constitution. Article II grants state legislatures—and only the state legislatures—the explicit power to determine the manner of appointing presidential electors.
In keeping with this constitutional responsibility, state legislatures have established detailed rules by which that state’s electoral process and appointment of presidential electors should be conducted. However, in the months before the 2020 election, it is undeniable that—in several key states—either state court judges or state executive officials acted deliberately to fundamentally change state election law, usurping the state legislature’s express authority under the Constitution.
In violation of the Constitution and with full knowledge of mail-in voting vulnerabilities, state officials, activists, and Democrat-led lawsuits in numerous states opened our electoral processes to fraud and abuse. The sheer volume of mail-in voting alone triggered not just administrative errors and clerical mistakes but actual election crimes.
As an alumnus of the Texas House of Representatives, I understand and guard zealously the prerogatives of state legislatures. As such, I feel strongly that the Supreme Court should have upheld the authority of those legislatures to establish the manner of appointing electors. Moreover, it was incumbent upon the court to determine the constitutional validity of any ballots that were cast under rules and procedures established by entities other than state legislatures.
Put bluntly, the usurpation of legislative power in several states produced unconstitutional ballots. As we asserted in our amicus brief that accompanied the Texas case, any state executive or judicial attempt to determine the manner of choosing electors-especially any attempt that directly contradicts the will of the state legislature—is void ab initio (“from the beginning”).
Regrettably, on December 11th, SCOTUS denied Texas’ motion for lack of standing, without ruling on the merits of the case or the questions of fact therein. However, Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, disagreed with the high court’s ruling, writing that, “In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction… I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint…” I, too, believe that the Supreme Court got it wrong. That highest court has original jurisdiction over, specifically, suits involving two or more states.
Today, we the Congress—on behalf of “We The People”—will exercise our constitutional duty as the final judge, jury, and arbiter of all contested congressional, senatorial, and presidential elections. The legitimacy of our republic rests on the foundation that our elections—whether for President of the United States or any other office—are transparent, fairly administered, and above board. With the undeniable knowledge of illegal changes to various state election laws, enacted by parties other than the respective state legislatures, we (the Congress) constitute the last line of defense in ensuring the trust of our citizens in the integrity of their ballots.
Every single member of Congress swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. Our constitutional republic has endured for nearly-two and a half centuries based on the consent of the governed. That consent is grounded in the confidence of our people in the legitimacy of our institutions of government, the most fundamental being free and fair elections. The erosion of that foundation jeopardizes the stability of the republic.
I will therefore join my colleagues today in objecting to counting the electoral votes of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, to restore the integrity of our electoral process.