House Republicans Sue To Block Proxy Voting In The Chamber

Not really.. Moreover if trump supports It he’ll should sign it. Let the courts figure it out later if it’s challenged

 

If the Dems weren't so evil they could be trusted.

 

Thanks for proving my point....

Dems are not evil...

Fact check that...

 

Hey you wanted to know why your side is always suspected of doing evil, I just gave you an answer.

 

I didn't see a question in my post... I already know the paranoia is out there. I would just hope simple common sense would prevail every now and then. I gave Trump full credit for signing his name to the First Step Act, a common sense measure (likely the first and last of this term)

I noticed you haven't weighed in on the guts of this thread.

Please explain how this 45 day COVID proxy voting window is doing evil... Will this change the voting patterns of this Congress somehow? Will a single bill now pass that wouldn't have passed before?

I just don't see it...

 

Good suit.

 

Common sense got thrown out the window once the Hag lost.

 

I see... Thanks for your response....

 

OK, we can disagree on that, but what does Trump do, in regards to my post #24?

Does he sign or veto that China sanctions bill voted on by proxy votes?

He's got a real Sophie's Choice here... I can almost see the ping pong ball bouncing around in that skull...

 

except the right supported it when Trump wanted it, and now is against it when he doesn't... guess they are like a cult

 

When was that?

 

for the stimulus

"Trump 'totally in favor' letting Congress vote remotely during coronavirus pandemic"

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/22/trump-supports-letting-congress-vote-remotely-duri/

 

GOOD!
Not only do these greedy democrats want to tax the hell out of everyone, now they wanna get paid to chill out at home in their pajamas. That's BS! They need to get back to the office like us lowly citizens do!

 

I think the constitution is quite clear. In order to conduct business a quorum must be present. That means at least 218 Representatives must be present. Now the Constitution doesn't state physically present, just must be present. Hence remote participation might qualify. I don't know not being a constitutional scholar. Being counted present via skype or some other type of teleconferencing most likely does count as being present. Again, I'm not sure.

I don't think proxy voting with the members who aren't present either remotely or physically is legal or constitutional. Now that would be up to the SCOTUS to decide. I would say one must be present in order to vote, that is implied, but not stated. I don't speak lawyerese, so I'll defer to the SCOTUS.

 

There's a difference. Teleconferencing, being counted present is one thing. The constitution does require a quorum to be present. whether that is physically or remotely, they are present. Proxy voting is different as the members who are letting someone else vote for them aren't present. They're absent.

at least that how I interpret the Constitution on this point. Remotely present via teleconferencing is completely different than being absent letting someone else cast your vote. I can see the difference, can you? Anyway, it will be left to the SCOTUS to decide. I don't speak or read in lawyerese, just plain English, so I could be completely wrong.

 

vote remotely =/= vote by proxy

also, no indication that 'the right supported it at the time' provided here...

 

You misplaced the always:
Corrected: “Because trump isn't right and we're not always a cult.”

They should just move to remote voting and be done with it. It would save taxpayers money and keep them closer to their constituents.

 

huh, voting by electronic means voting by proxy, as you are not in person voting

 

they are present via electronic means, someone has to count the vote, be it a member of their staff or whoever that records it, same thing

 

Come on SCOTUS! Shut this down NOW! I pray it is found unconstitutional!! More Dems shirking their responsibilities to the American people. Oh wait, that is SOP for them!

 

You either misunderstood me or totally ignored the difference. Voting remotely is the individual representative voting via teleconference or something akin to that. He is present, abet remotely. Voting via proxy, those who are allowing another representative to vote for him aren't present either remotely or physically. They are absent. If they were present, either physically or remotely, they could cast their own vote by themselves. Being totally absent, not present is when someone else casts your vote via proxy.

Big difference. In today's electronic world, checking in remotely to cast a vote isn't hard at all. No need for anyone to use a proxy.

 

The quorum argument is a non-starter... they must have had a quorum in yesterday's proxy vote and most likely today's PPP vote (417-1 - with a reported 71 proxy votes - you do the math).... If they don't have a quorum, there won't be votes.

Again, I highly doubt this will ever reach the SCOTUS, and if it does, they won't interfere with another branches temporary rules during a pandemic...

Please read and respond to my post #24.... What is Trump going to do on the China sanctions bill (already approved by the Senate, approved yesterday by the House with a proxy vote, and Trump generally supports)?

 

same would be true here, either a computer system handles it by proxy or a human

 

Well, I'm not sure I'd support that either... Full time remote voting would take away some of the debate that SHOULD be required in a bi-partisan world.

But having a full time remote voting option for situations like this (plus local natural disasters, illnesses, or family emergencies) seems like an idea we need to explore.. Sort of like an absentee ballot for the Congress...

 

except thats not what they're calling 'proxy voting.' They're specifically trying to get 1 rep to cast a vote for many others. which not only still requires some to show up and risk infection when phone/video conference would eliminate any risk, but also unecessarily complicates/confuses the process when miscomunication innevitably occurs. Why not just do video conferencing from home like the rest of the country is doing for business meetings?