Washington – This morning, Wyoming Congresswoman and House GOP Conference Chair Liz Cheney (R-WY) joined her colleagues at a press conference to discuss the lawsuit filed that challenges House Democrats’ plan to vote by proxy.
See her comments below, as well as an answer to a question where she explains why it is critical for the House of Representatives to find a way to operate, but Democrats’ approach was rammed through and infringes on the Constitution:
REP. LIZ CHENEY: “You know, we’re in the midst of a grave national public health and economic crisis, and as Members of Congress, we have an obligation to ensure that Congress can operate. Now, there are different views and perspectives up here in terms of remote voting. We’ve all tried very hard to work in a bipartisan fashion. We’ve all tried to reach across the aisle and work with our counterparts on the Democratic side to help to come up with ways that Congress can operate, to help to come up with ways we can fulfill the constitutional requirement that we be present. Now, in my own view, being present doesn’t necessarily require physical presence. I think that remote operations are possible, but that’s not the path the Democrats have gone down. What the Democrats have done, instead of working with us, is use this crisis to try to gain partisan benefit. What the Democrats have done, counter to their own report, you know, a number of us, including Ranking Member of the Rules Committee, Mr. Cole, and the Leader and the Whip, a number of us have worked closely with the Democrats to try to say, ‘listen, let’s come up with ways, as we did after 9/11, that we can operate in the middle of a pandemic, and let’s also look for ways to protect us in the future.’
“We know there will be future crises and we know that we’ve got to come up with ways we can operate in the future. There may be circumstances when we cannot assemble at the Capitol and it may be that we need to look at things like voting remotely. But instead of going down that path, despite the fact that we have tried to work together, after the Speaker of the House delayed for weeks and weeks, refused to even address the issue, she then commissioned a report. The report came up with some interesting suggestions. There were some good suggestions in the report. The report also noted that proxy voting was likely unconstitutional – the Democrats’ own report. So, instead of going down the path of saying “how can we do this together,” the Democrats adopted a completely partisan scheme and they have done it in a way that absolutely infringes on the rights of the minority and infringes on the Constitution. It’s a sad day that we have got to be in the position where we’re bringing suit against the Speaker, we’re bringing suit against the Democrats in order to prevent them from pushing this proxy vote through.”
REP. LIZ CHENEY: “Thank you. Listen, I think that we’ve all, as I mentioned, we’ve all looked at different ways that we could operate and in fact, there could be circumstances – you could imagine a mass casualty attack, you can imagine any sort of a national security crisis where it might not be possible for Members to assemble here in the chamber, and so I think looking at what presence means is a legal question. I would note, however, that this lawsuit does not get to that issue. This lawsuit does not get to the issue of whether remote voting is constitutional. This issue in the lawsuit is proxy voting. The point that we are making is, you know, we all have an interest in joining together in a bipartisan fashion to make sure that the People’s House can operate and that the people’s voice can be heard.
“Unfortunately in this case, the Democrats simply rammed through a change which they themselves said in their own report was questionable constitutionally. They rammed it through on a partisan basis in a way that absolutely takes away the voice of many of the constituents of the people who are not represented. I think with respect to the issue of the constitutionality of proxy voting, we’re absolutely unified on that. I think all of these issues require deep research, study, attention, as you saw from Mr. Johnson, to what the Constitution says to what the Framers intended and also a recognition of the most important thing is for this body to be able to operate. If we create a situation where the Speaker of the House for weeks and weeks and weeks refused to deal with remote voting, refused to bring us together to operate, you create a situation where the body doesn’t operate. I cannot imagine that anybody who really has the interest of the American people at the forefront of their mind is going to think that in a national crisis we ought to have only the President of the United States operating.
“The People’s House has got to be here and we’ve got to be working. I think there is no question.”
