Recognizing the Significance of Community College Month in April
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, of all the serious issues facing this country, including but not limited to the affordability challenges that so many working families are struggling with, I can't believe we are back here debating a partisan attempt to rush through what I referred to as a solution in search of a problem.
As we all know, and particularly the voters of Virginia will remind us, voting is already underway this election year. And instead of working to keep our elections safe and secure by making it more accessible for eligible Americans to cast their ballot in our elections, we have back before us a measure that would make it harder for eligible citizens to register to vote, to stay registered to vote, to cast their ballot, and make it tougher for election administrators and volunteers to administer our democracy, as is so fundamental to our country.
We have already gone down this road for several weeks and weeks and weeks now. We have debated the so-called SAVE America Act, but I think, despite how you talked about the SAVE America Act, which has certainly not passed the Senate, even my Republican colleagues who have seen the measure suggested by our colleague from Louisiana, it is an even more extreme version.
Let me begin by saying, we already know that you have to be a citizen to vote in our elections. That is nothing new. That is already existing law. And despite the President's claims, there is zero evidence of massive voter fraud across the country, which is the premise of these proposals. So not only is it a solution in search of a problem, to paraphrase a wise man, this measure is all foam and no beer.
This amendment seeks to eliminate or, at a minimum, restrict early voting opportunities which 47 States in the country offer for eligible citizens, 47 States. Why we would want to take away opportunities for citizens to participate in our democracy, I don't know.
This proposal also suggests that all ballots be counted within 36 hours of the election. That may sound good, and it may be very doable in States with smaller populations and smaller numbers of registered voters, but in the larger States, yes, it takes more time to count more ballots. And I know we can all agree that we want to do it securely to maintain election integrity, things to ensure that if a ballot comes in on election day, that that voter hasn't already voted by mail. It takes a minute to cross-reference those records.
Or a ballot that is received on time by mail that you conduct a signature verification to help confirm that the person submitting that ballot is indeed the voter. You need more than 36 hours when you have more than 20 million voters like we have in my home State of California.
So what is this proposed amendment really about? It is about holding on to power because the President knows that his agenda has failed, and it is not just extremely unpopular but has done damage to families across the country.
Just look at his most recent executive order seeking to ban vote-by- mail--changes to the rules when the primary season is already underway. But the language has these changes go into immediate effect, just adding to the rising costs, just adding to the rising chaos, just adding to the rising corruption.
And it is unfortunate that the election administration has been turned into a partisan issue.
I actually ask our colleagues to protect the early voters, not just in my State but in yours. Protect vote-by-mail opportunities, not just in my State but in yours. Let's protect women who are married and change their name and their right to vote, not just in my State but in yours.
Colleagues, I urge a ``no'' vote on amendment No. 5414. Point of Order
And, furthermore, Madam President, I raise a point of order that the pending amendment is not germane and, therefore, violates section 305(b)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1984.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 4855 and ask that it be reported by number.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, my amendment would create a point of order against reconciliation bills that would provide funding for Federal Agencies that still have unobligated funds left over from previous reconciliation bills.
Now, as I have described this amendment, many people are thinking: Well, that is pretty common sense. Why is this even necessary?
Well, let me remind us that ICE and CBP still have a combined total of $103 billion in unspent funds from last year's ``Big Anything But Beautiful Bill.'' You heard me right: $103 billion. Let that sink in.
Let that sink in.
ICE is still sitting on $63.2 billion of its funding. That is 84 percent of the funding from that bill. The CBP is sitting on $40 billion. That is 62 percent of the funding from last year's bill. So what are we even doing here? There is $103 billion that is unspent, and you are trying to give them another $140 billion.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PADILLA. This doesn't make sense.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PADILLA. So, colleagues, I urge you to vote yes on amendment No. 4855.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PADILLA. Vote on Motion
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source