mesut/congress_speeches huggingface dataset:
ELECTION IRREGULARITIES
Christopher H. Smith (Republican, NJ) \u2014 2021-1-6

. Madam , after rigorous analysis and much reflection, I will not oppose the counting of certified electoral votes from any state. prgtoken I share some of the concerns about election irregularities. Today's proceedings give Congress the opportunity to raise concerns about alleged election wrongdoing in several states which I hope will ultimately lead to bipartisan state investigations and reform to ensure fair and free elections. prgtoken Today, however, Congress is tasked with counting the electoral votes sent by each state. Nullifying the electors of any state requires proof that electors were not ``lawfully certified'' according to state laws. prgtoken In early December, Attorney General William Barr told the Associated Press that ``U.S. attorneys and FBI agents have been working to follow up specific complaints and information they've received, but ``to date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election.'' prgtoken All elections in the United States must be free and fair--any action to subvert, cheat, prgtoken suppress or steal any election should be investigated and prosecuted. prgtoken Even if the nefarious activity was minor--and not likely to alter the outcome of an election--individuals who engage in such acts should be held accountable in a court of law. prgtoken Noone has a license to cheat. prgtoken Sixteen years ago, some ic members of the Senate and House tried to overturn the results of the -Kerry Presidential election. They failed. When counting the electoral votes on January 6, 2005, I voted ``no'' on the objection to accepting Ohio's electors--enough to reverse the outcome of the election--sponsored by Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Oh) because the allegations lacked both merit and proof. Only 31 Members of the House voted in favor of the election changing objection. prgtoken Congress, states and local governments need to undertake a top-to- bottom review of election law and administrative polices to ensure that elections are free and fair. prgtoken The future of our Nation depends on it. prgtoken Finally, I unequivocally condemn the assault on the Capitol today. And those who committed violence, vandalism and other crimes should be prosecuted to the greatest extent of the law. prgtoken Special thanks to the Capitol Police and all law enforcement for their brave and decisive actions to mitigate and then end today's crisis. prgtoken Despite its many flaws, the U.S. Congress continues to be an extraordinary marketplace of ideas and differing opinions. prgtoken The enactment of wise public policy to benefit all Americans requires robust dialogue and debate--and genuine respect for one another especially when there is fundamental disagreement. prgtoken We must be committed to zero-tolerance towards violence in any form.
COUNTING ELECTORAL VOTES--JOINT SESSION OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE HELD PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1
Jeff Duncan (Republican, SC) \u2014 2021-1-6

. Madam , this process we are going through today isn't about personalities. This isn't about or . As hard as some try to paint it that way, let me say that names and personalities don't matter. This is, gravely, about the Constitution of the United States. prgtoken Almost 20 years ago, after the attacks on 9/11, Americans were persuaded to give up some of their constitutional liberties. Using the justification of that global crisis, the terrorist attacks on that fateful day, America saw the erosion of their liberties for the safety and security many felt they may receive through the USA PATRIOT Act and other resulting processes too many felt would keep us safe from another attack here on our shore. prgtoken This year, using the justification of the global pandemic, COVID-19, we once again saw our Nation's Constitution violated. You see, the Constitution is clear in Article II, Madam , that the power and duty to set the manner of national elections rests solely with the State legislatures. prgtoken That power doesn't rest with us. That power didn't rest in the hands of unelected county election officials, secretaries of state, or a supreme court but, rather, in the hands of the State legislatures, which pass laws setting the manner of elections held in their States. prgtoken This year, using the extraordinary circumstance of the COVID-19 pandemic, we witnessed these duly passed laws circumvented and usurped time and again, not by having the laws changed in the respective State legislative bodies, but those laws arbitrarily prgtoken and unilaterally changed by county clerks; secretaries of state; and, in this case of Pennsylvania, an elected supreme court, which is supposed to interpret the law, not make law. prgtoken When those nonlegislative entities change the laws without getting the general assemblies to change the law, in my opinion, the resulting ballots cast, either by mail or in person, those ballots were illegal under the law. prgtoken Illegal ballots should not be counted. Therefore, the resulting electoral votes should be considered invalid. prgtoken What bothers me is that so many of you are okay with that, that so many Americans, because their person won, you are okay with the manner in which that victory was gained. prgtoken It is politics. Look, I get it. But we didn't swear an oath to play politics. We swore an oath to the United States Constitution. As George Washington said: The Constitution is the guide which I will never abandon.
COUNTING ELECTORAL VOTES--JOINT SESSION OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE HELD PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1
Mike Johnson (Republican, LA) \u2014 2021-1-6

. Madam , we have a solemn responsibility today. We must vote to sustain objections to slates of electors submitted by States that we genuinely believe clearly violated the Constitution in the Presidential election of 2020. prgtoken This is the threshold legal question before us, and it is an issue before us for the State of Arizona. We have to repeat this for emphasis because a lot of people seem to be confused. prgtoken Because judges and not the State legislature changed the rules of the election, Arizona clearly violated the plain language of Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution in its selection of Presidential electors. prgtoken The Framers of our Constitution recognized that elections were susceptible to corruption. We all know that. So, how did they fix it? How did they provide for that? They created the electoral college as a safeguard, and they expressly empowered State legislatures to ensure the integrity of our unique election system. prgtoken Only the State legislatures, because they are a full body of representatives and not rogue officials, were given the authority to direct the manner of appointing Presidential electors because it was so important. prgtoken The Supreme Court has acknowledged this over and over. They previously affirmed in Article II, Section 1, Clause 2: ``The appointment of these electors is thus placed absolutely and wholly with the legislatures of the several States.'' That authority can never be taken away or abdicated. prgtoken The Arizona Legislature did enact detailed rules and procedures that the State was supposed to follow to choose its electors. But in the months preceding the 2020 election, as we have heard--and by the way, a thousand pages of evidence have just been submitted on the facts on this--those well-established rules and procedures were deliberately changed. prgtoken They weren't changed by the legislature, friends. They were changed by judges. And those actions taken by the judiciary were not limited to mere interpretations of existing law. No, they were substantive, wholesale changes to those statutes. prgtoken Madam , that is a usurpation of the authority that the legislature had. That usurpation was repeated across the country this year. It is the primary reason--it is one of the reasons why the election of 2020 became riddled with an unprecedented number of serious allegations of fraud and irregularities all over the country. prgtoken National polls, it has been said, indicate that a huge percentage of Americans now have serious doubts about not just the outcome of this Presidential contest but also the future reliability of our election system itself. prgtoken Since we are convinced that the election laws in Arizona and some other key States were changed in this unconstitutional manner, we have a responsibility today. The slates of electors produced under those modified laws are thus unconstitutional. They are not ``regularly given'' or ``lawfully
COUNTING ELECTORAL VOTES--JOINT SESSION OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE HELD PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1
Lee M. Zeldin (Republican, NY) \u2014 2021-1-6

. Madam , my constitutional oath is sacred, and I have a duty to speak out about confirmed evidence-filled issues with the administration of the 2020 Presidential election in certain battleground States. prgtoken Signature verification, ballot observation, voter roll integrity, voter ID requirements, and ballot collection protections were weakened on top of the millions of mailboxes that were flooded with unrequested mail-in ballots. prgtoken Many of my constituents have been outraged and demanding that I voice their objections here today. prgtoken This debate is necessary because rogue election officials, secretaries of state, and courts circumvented State election laws. They made massive changes to how their State's election would be run. These acts, among other issues, were unlawful and unconstitutional. prgtoken Congress has the duty to defend the Constitution and any powers of State legislatures that were usurped. prgtoken Some claim today's objections set new precedent by challenging State electors. That claim, of course, ignores that have objected every time a Presidential candidate has won an election over the past generation. If you don't have any observations today, that is your call, but don't lecture about precedent. prgtoken Over the past 4 years, boycotted President 's inauguration and State of the Union Addresses, pushed the -Russia collusion conspiracies and investigations and knowingly lied about it, voted to impeach the President before even knowing what to impeach him for, and then actually passed Articles of Impeachment before Senate voted to remove him from office. prgtoken Today's debate is necessary, especially because of the insistence that everything President and his supporters say about the 2020 election is evidence-free. That is simply not true. prgtoken No one can honestly claim it is evidence-free. When I say that, in Arizona, courts unilaterally extended the legislatively set deadline to register to vote. prgtoken The Arizona State Senate issued subpoenas post-election to get information from the Maricopa County board on various election matters, but the board and the courts refused to help at all to let the State senate complete its constitutional duties. prgtoken In Pennsylvania, where State legislators wrote us about their powers being usurped, the majority on the State supreme court changed signature, signature matching and postal marking requirements. The date to submit mail-in ballots was extended contradictory to the date set by State law. prgtoken The State legislature expanded no-excuse mail-in balloting without a constitutional amendment. Constitutions apply to the acts of all branches of government. prgtoken The issue was magnified by the voter rolls being so inaccurate that more voters submitted ballots than there were registered voters. Signature authentication rules for absentee and mail-in ballots were weak
OBJECTION TO COUNTING OF PENNSYLVANIA ELECTORAL VOTES
Patrick J. Toomey (Republican, PA) \u2014 2021-1-6

I appreciate the indulgence of my colleagues allowing me to speak twice today. But my understanding is that later this evening, objectors will object to the certification of Pennsylvania's electoral votes because they disapprove of the process that my State used in the last election. So in light of my expectation of this objection, I rise to defend the right of my citizens, my constituents, to vote in the Presidential election. prgtoken Let's be clear. That is exactly what this objection is about. It is what it would do. It would overturn the results of the Presidential election in Pennsylvania, and it would thereby deny Pennsylvania's voters the opportunity to even participate in the Presidential election. prgtoken Even if Congress did have the constitutional responsibility to judge the worthiness of a State's election process, which it does not, rejecting Pennsylvania's electoral votes would still be wildly out of proportion to the purported offenses and very damaging to our Republic. prgtoken Let me go through a few facts about Pennsylvania. prgtoken First, some of the objectors and, in fact, even the President of the United States this morning have observed that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court disregarded existing law when it ruled that mail-in ballots could be counted even if they arrived up to 3 days after election day. prgtoken Now, the objectors are right about that. In my view, the Supreme Court of the United States should overturn that illegal decision. But only 10,097 ballots arrived in Pennsylvania during the 3 days after the election, and those 10,097 ballots have been excluded from the vote count that resulted in President-Elect winning Pennsylvania by about 80,000 votes. What greater remedy could the objectors possibly want than the complete exclusion of the late-arriving ballots? How could we possibly invalidate the entire Pennsylvania election over 10,000 votes that were not even included in the vote count? prgtoken A second charge we heard--and the Senator from Missouri alluded to it this evening--is that a 2019 Pennsylvania law that allows mail-in ballots for any reason--that that might violate the Pennsylvania Constitution. First of all, as Senator Casey observed, this was a bipartisan law passed with nearly unanimous support. Clearly, the State legislators and the Governor believe it is consistent with the Pennsylvania Constitution. prgtoken Secondly, this law was not challenged when it was passed. It wasn't challenged when it was applied during the June primary election. It was challenged only after President lost the general election. But 2.6 million Pennsylvanians voted by mail-in ballot in the general election. Over 37 percent of Pennsylvania voters, in good faith, relied on a law to cast their votes, as they had done previously. Now, I understand you can make a theoretical argument about whether this is consistent with Pennsylvania's Constitution, an
UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT
Thom Tillis (Republican, NC) \u2014 2021-1-6

the American people should have full faith in our election system, which is why I led the passage of voter ID legislation in North Carolina and why I supported President 's right to call for recounts and bring challenges to the courts. I share the concerns of many Americans regarding the lack of security of widespread mail-in voting and the partisan actions of activist ic lawyers who succeeded in making questionable changes to the voting process while Americans were already casting their ballots. Even if it wasn't enough to change the outcome of the election, irregularities and fraud are never acceptable, and they should be investigated and prosecuted when appropriate. prgtoken The Framers of our Constitution made it clear that the power to certify elections is reserved to the States, not Congress. Refusing to certify State election results has no viable path to success, and, most importantly, it lends legitimacy to the left's stated policy objective of completely federalizing elections and eliminating the electoral college. Congress should not overstep its constitutional authority by overturning the results of States and the will of American voters, especially absent legitimate requests from States for Congress to intervene. prgtoken It is a precedent we should not set, and Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer should not have the power to set aside electors after the 2024 election and overrule Federal courts and the Constitution as they see fit. prgtoken I was proud to support President 's agenda and campaign with him, and I am deeply disappointed he was not reelected despite his success in creating jobs, cutting taxes, securing a conservative judiciary, reforming the VA, and rebuilding our military. Although I certainly wish the results were different, Congress cannot change them without inflicting irreparable damage to our constitutional Republic. I will not oppose the certification of the electoral college votes, and I will not embolden politicians in the future to appoint our Presidents instead of having the American people duly elect them.
OBJECTING TO CERTAIN ELECTORAL VOTES
Randy K. Weber, Sr. (Republican, TX) \u2014 2021-1-6

. Madam , 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 '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. prgtoken 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. prgtoken In violation of the Constitution and with full knowledge of mail-in voting vulnerabilities, state officials, activists, and -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. prgtoken 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. prgtoken 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''). prgtoken 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 tha
COUNTING ELECTORAL VOTES--JOINT SESSION OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE HELD PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1
Andy Harris (Republican, MD) \u2014 2021-1-6

. Madam , I thank the gentleman for yielding. prgtoken The oath I took is very simple. Madam , you administered it. It is to support and defend the Constitution. prgtoken Now, as you walk back to the office buildings, you will walk by that wall that has when the various States accepted that Constitution. Remember, when a State accepts the Constitution, it agrees to accept every part of the Constitution. It doesn't get to pick and choose. prgtoken Pennsylvania was there when it was written. They were so enthusiastic about the Constitution, they approved it in 1787. prgtoken My State, Maryland, is a little further down the wall, 1788. They were there when it was written. prgtoken The clause that gave the legislature the power over the elections was there when they accepted it. It has been there since. How dare the judicial branch or the executive branch of that State usurp the legislative authority. That is a clear violation of the Constitution. prgtoken Now, we heard there is no evidence. prgtoken Evidence? prgtoken The Pennsylvania Supreme Court unilaterally extended the deadline to receive absentee and mail-in ballots. prgtoken Does anybody contest that over here? Does it say the legislature did that? prgtoken No, it doesn't. It says the court did it. prgtoken That is a violation. That is what the Texas lawsuit was all about. We disadvantage other States when States like Pennsylvania, the executive branch and judicial branch, cheat on the Constitution; and that is what they did here. prgtoken But there is more evidence. But wait, there is more. The secretary of the Commonwealth eroded integrity by dismissing signature authentication on a ballot. prgtoken Does anyone here believe the Pennsylvania legislature would have agreed prgtoken to create a separate system for mail-in ballots and in-person ballots? That if you mail it in, you don't need a signature? But if you vote in person, you do and it has to be authenticated? prgtoken Of course not. The legislature clearly wouldn't have agreed to that. But that didn't stop the usurpation of constitutional authority. prgtoken Madam Chair, I vigorously support this objection, and I include in the Record the objection to counting the electoral votes for the State of Arizona additional signers. Objection to Counting the Electoral Votes for the State of Arizona Additional Signers Jeff Duncan SC-3 Matt Gaetz FL-1