Adjacent posts
Ideas for what to read next
Ideas for what to read next
Enjoyed what you just read? Make a donation
Thank you for reading The Cascadia Advocate, the Northwest Progressive Institute’s journal of world, national, and local politics.
Founded in March of 2004, The Cascadia Advocate has been helping people throughout the Pacific Northwest and beyond make sense of current events with rigorous analysis and thought-provoking commentary for more than fifteen years. The Cascadia Advocate is funded by readers like you and trusted sponsors. We don’t run ads or publish content in exchange for money.
Help us keep The Cascadia Advocate editorially independent and freely available to all by becoming a member of the Northwest Progressive Institute today. Or make a donation to sustain our essential research and advocacy journalism.
Your contribution will allow us to continue bringing you features like Last Week In Congress, live coverage of events like Netroots Nation or the Democratic National Convention, and reviews of books and documentary films.
NPI’s essential research and advocacy is sponsored by:
Sunday, May 17th, 2020
Last Week In Congress: How Cascadia’s U.S. lawmakers voted (May 11th-15th)
Good morning! Here’s how Cascadia’s Members of Congress voted on major issues during the legislative week ending Friday, May 15th, 2020.
In the United States House of Representatives
The House chamber (U.S. Congress photo)
CONDUCTING HOUSE BUSINESS BY REMOTE VOTING: Voting 217 for and 189 against, the House on May 15th changed its rules to allow members to vote remotely in floor proceedings for the first time in the 231-year history of the institution. The measure (H. Resolution 965) also permits House committees to conduct committee business by remote connections including video links.
A response to the coronavirus pandemic, the resolution provides that the rules we subject to a vote of renewal in forty-five days (or else shall expire). For voting on the House floor, each physically-present member would be authorized to vote by proxy for up to ten absent colleagues whose voting instructions, filed electronically with the clerk’s office, he or she would be obligated to follow.
Jim McGovern, D‑Massachusetts, said: “This is not just about protecting members of Congress [but] about protecting all of those who come in contact with us.Convening Congress must not turn onto a super-spreader event. Technology has changed considerably over the last 231 years. There are now tools available to make committee proceedings and remote voting on the House floor possible.”
Mac Thornberry, R‑Texas, said: “Through the Civil War, the 1918 flu, World War II, [September 11th, 2001], throughout our history, there has never been proxy voting on this floor. Members accepted the risk and carried out their duty to the best of their ability. It was not about technology, it was about trust and integrity. Were our predecessors so much braver than we are?”
A yes vote was to adopt the resolution.
Voting Nay (2): Republican Representatives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson
Voting Aye (4): Democratic Representatives Suzanne Bonamici, Earl Blumenauer, Peter DeFazio, Kurt Schrader
Voting Nay (1): Republican Representative Greg Walden
Voting Aye (6): Democratic Representatives Suzan DelBene, Derek Kilmer, Pramila Jayapal, Kim Schrier, Adam Smith, and Denny Heck
Voting Nay (4): Democratic Representative Rick Larsen; Republican Representatives Jaime Herrera-Beutler, Dan Newhouse, and Cathy McMorris Rodgers
Cascadia total: 10 aye votes, 7 nay votes
APPROVING $3 TRILLION FOR CORONAVIRUS RELIEF: Voting 208 for and 199 against, the House on May 15th approved a $3 trillion coronavirus relief package (H.R. 6800, the HEROES Act) that includes:
In addition, the bill would:
Kweisi Mfume, D‑Maryland, said the bill “provides real support for American heroes. Our cops, our teachers, our firemen, our first responders. It is supported by Republicans, and somebody needs to say that. Republican governors. Republican mayors. And Republican members from that side of the aisle that will vote for this.”
Steve Scalise, R‑Louisiana., said “we should also be talking about what’s not in this bill. [Democrats] have $500 billion in this package for states including many who already wrecked their economy and had billion dollar deficits prior to COVID-19. What’s not in this bill is money to hold China accountable for this whole mess.”
A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate.
Voting Nay (2): Republican Representatives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson
Voting Aye (3): Democratic Representatives Suzanne Bonamici, Earl Blumenauer, and Peter DeFazio
Voting Nay (2): Democratic Representative Kurt Schrader; Republican Representative Greg Walden
Voting Aye (6): Democratic Representatives Suzan DelBene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Pramila Jayapal, Kim Schrier, Adam Smith, and Denny Heck
Voting Nay (4): Democratic Representative Pramila Jayapal; Republican Representatives Jaime Herrera-Beutler, Dan Newhouse, and Cathy McMorris Rodgers
Cascadia total: 9 aye votes, 8 nay votes
REJECTING REPUBLICAN CHANGE TO HEROES ACT ID: Voting 198 for and 209 against, the House on May 15th defeated a Republican motion to strip H.R. 6800 (above) of a provision that would broaden ID requirements for receiving coronavirus stimulus checks. The disputed provision is intended to benefit, among others, those who do not have a Social Security number and do not file a federal tax return because of low income. It allows them to use an IRS Taxpayer Identification Number to obtain a stimulus check to which they are entitled by law.
The first stimulus round of $1,200 for individuals and $2,400 for families up to certain income levels was approved by Congress in late March, and the second round is funded in the current bill (H.R. 6800).
Denver Riggleman, R‑Virginia., said the ID provision would “allow illegal immigrants and non-citizens to get checks they are not eligible for.Now more than ever, we need to make sure these rebate checks go to Americans who need them.”
Nita Lowey, D‑New York, said “the only thing Republicans can offer is regurgitated talking points about immigration. COVID-19 does not discriminate or differentiate on immigration status. Our country doesn’t have time for Republicans to relitigate the culture wars.”
A yes vote was to adopt the Republican motion.
Voting Aye (2): Republican Representatives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson
Voting Aye (1): Republican Representative Greg Walden
Voting Nay (4): Democratic Representatives Suzanne Bonamici, Earl Blumenauer, Peter DeFazio, and Kurt Schrader
Voting Aye (3): Republican Representatives Jaime Herrera-Beutler, Dan Newhouse, and Cathy McMorris Rodgers
Voting Nay (7): Democratic Representatives Suzan DelBene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Pramila Jayapal, Kim Schrier, Adam Smith, and Denny Heck
Cascadia total: 6 aye votes, 11 nay votes
In the United States Senate
The Senate chamber (U.S. Congress photo)
RENEWING DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY: Voting 80 for and 16 against, the Senate on May 14th approved a five-year extension (H.R. 6172) of three sections of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that require periodic congressional renewal because of their direct clash with Americans’ civil liberties. One section allows law enforcement to place roving wiretaps on homegrown or foreign terrorist suspects moving about the United States, and another authorizes government surveillance on U.S. soil of foreign “lone wolf” suspects not linked to terrorist organizations.
Under the third section, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court can authorize forever-secret FBI searches of domestic library, bookstore and business records if the agency shows “reasonable grounds” the targeted information is vital to an ongoing domestic probe of specifically defined foreign-sponsored threats to national security. This authority is rooted in Section 215 of FISA, a law enacted in 1978 and expanded after the attacks of September 11th, 2001, to strengthen government powers to detect and prevent terrorist threats to America.
In part, this bill prohibits the use of Section 215 to obtain GPS and cell-phone locations; requires most information obtained in Section 215 searches to be destroyed after five years; requires the attorney general to approve in writing FISA warrants issued against elected officials or candidates; expands Civil Liberties Oversight Board powers to monitor abuses in the discharge of the FISA law; restricts the National Security Agency’s already-scaled-back collection of meta data on telecommunications passing through U.S. switching points; and requires the government to disclose within 180 days all substantive opinions by the FISA court.
John Cornyn, R‑Texas, said the FISA statute “has been amended several times over the more than thirty years that it has been law, particularly since 9/11…. It is time to, once again, strengthen the oversight of our nation’s intelligence activities and restore trust in our critical institutions.”
Rand Paul, R‑Kentucky, said the original sponsors of the FISA law, “who intended to restrain unconstitutional searches, would be appalled at what the FISA court has become…that this secret court intended to be used to investigate foreign spies and terrorists was turned into a powerful and invasive force to infiltrate and disrupt the political process.”
A yes vote was to send the bill back to the House.
Voting Aye (2):
Republican Senators Jim Risch and Mike Crapo
Voting Nay (2):
Democratic Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley
Voting Nay (2):
Democratic Senators Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray
Cascadia total: 2 aye votes, 4 nay votes
EXPANDING CIVIL LIBERTIES SAFEGUARDS: Voting 77 for and 19 against, the Senate on May 13th amended H.R. 6172 (above) to expand civil liberties’ protections for religious institutions, public officials, news organizations and other parties targeted or innocently swept up in probes conducted under Section 215 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The amendment would give judges in the secret FISA courts more authority to order independent “amicus curiae’ legal reviews by outside counsel of government actions in such cases.
Patrick Leahy, D‑Vermont., said: “We have an opportunity to reform our flawed surveillance authorities. These opportunities don’t come by often. We shouldn’t squander it, especially when the Justice Department’s own inspector general has been alerting us of the widespread problems within the FISA process.”
No senator spoke against the amendment.
A yes vote was to adopt the amendment.
Voting Aye (2):
Republican Senators Jim Risch and Mike Crapo
Voting Aye (2):
Democratic Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley
Voting Aye (1): Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell
Not Voting (1): Democratic Senator Patty Murray
Cascadia total: 5 aye votes, 1 not voting
REQUIRING WARRANTS TO OBTAIN COPIES OF WEB BROWSER SEARCHES: Voting 59 for and 37 against, the Senate on May 13th rejected an amendment to HR 6172 (above) that sought to prohibit federal investigators from conducting warrantless searches of Internet browser and search-engine histories under Section 215 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Supporters needed sixty votes to gain approval of their amendment and came one shy.
Steve Daines, R‑Montana, said: “Browser data is extremely personal, sensitive, and should require a probable cause warrant to access. If you want to see an American’s search history, then you better go to a judge and get a warrant.”
Opponents said that the amendment would imperil national security by delaying FISA court approval of government applications to surveil terrorism suspects on U.S. soil. A yes vote was to adopt the amendment.
Voting Aye (2):
Republican Senators Jim Risch and Mike Crapo
Voting Aye (2):
Democratic Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley
Voting Aye (1): Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell
Not Voting (1): Democratic Senator Patty Murray
Cascadia total: 5 aye votes, 1 not voting
Key votes ahead
The Senate will debate judicial and executive branch nominations during the week of May 18th, and the House of Representatives will be in recess.
Editor’s Note: The information in NPI’s weekly How Cascadia’s U.S. lawmakers voted feature is provided by Voterama in Congress, a service of Thomas Voting Reports. All rights are reserved. Reproduction of this post is not permitted, not even with attribution. Use the permanent link to this post to share it… thanks!
© 2020 Thomas Voting Reports.
# Written by Franklin Roosevelt :: 7:30 AM
Categories: Legislative Advocacy, Series & Special Reports
Tags: Last Week In Congress, U.S. House Roll Call Votes, U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes
Comments and pings are currently closed.