Despite coronavirus, Nancy Pelosi says remote voting in Congress is a long way off
Source: San Francisco Chronicle
WASHINGTON Its unclear when it will be safe again for Americans to travel cross-country or gather dozens to a room amid the coronavirus pandemic. But Congress might have to do it soon anyway.
There is no way for members of Congress to cast votes without being in the Capitol. And despite mounting calls, especially from younger lawmakers, for a way to vote remotely, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says any such changes are a long way off.
Were not there yet, and were not going to be there no matter how many letters somebody sends in with all the respect in the world for that, the San Francisco Democrat told reporters in a call Thursday.
Pelosi cited a number of concerns, including the security of any technology used, the constitutionality of changes to the rules, the logistics of having members vote on the change, and the time needed to be sure any new system is well thought out and bipartisan.
Read more: https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Despite-coronavirus-Nancy-Pelosi-says-remote-15190782.php
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)Jesus, who has to DIE before this changes?
kirby
(4,441 posts)I have heard of all of those... None of them can assure the person voting remotely is actually the congressperson, isn't being coerced, computer virus isn't flipping the vote during transmission, etc.
There is no reason they shouldn't have been working on this for a long time, but none of those off the shelf products are going to meet the needs of voting....
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)I work for a multimillion $ company and deal with highly sensitive patient information every day. Been working from home for years. Multi-factor authentication is the key. I enter a pin, they send me a random code, I put in the code, all over a secure router provided by the company that ensures no one can hack in.
Plus voice authentication. Not only that, they can see my face on video chat.
I don't see how it should be any different for congress.
kirby
(4,441 posts)It needs to be well thought out and secured, nothing that can be done in the next few months during a pandemic. Lots of multi-factor 2FA solutions rely on the sending of a code to a cell phone... Those can be hacked or redirected with malware.
Put it this way... Classified defense systems are not allowed to be connected to any external networks.
Seeing your face on video chat does not mean you are present or that it is secure. When billions / trillions of dollars are at stake or declarations of war are at stake, there is little room for a system that is not fully secure. There are so many issues to consider...for example the issue of denial of service. An important vote is required and an adversary targets and brings down the servers preventing the vote or a quorum on the vote.
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)And they should be working on it yesterday, if only as a contingency plan. Multi-billion dollar companies do it every day, again, I know first hand.
Put it another way, if it were physically impossible for congress to meet in person (another 9/11 situation where they can't fly for example), they'd figure out a way to do it.
Being stubborn and saying "we're a long way away" is not being prepared for an emergency.
pbmus
(12,418 posts)And stop this antiquated stadium seating voting with meaningless speeches and campaign style votes...
rpannier
(24,304 posts)Kind of like I misunderstood what the article was about
Sorry about that
Have a nice day
Polybius
(15,238 posts)That could take years.
former9thward
(31,802 posts)The Constitution says both the House and Senate shall make their own rules. No amendment is needed. Just someone who realizes this is 2020 and there is no reason to have to sit in one room in one city to vote and discuss things.
moose65
(3,164 posts)Even now, they're not all in the room! The last time I was in DC I went into the House chamber, and there was no one there except the person who was speaking and the C-SPAN cameras. One of the people in my Rep's office told us that they rarely all go into the House chamber together- they stay in their offices and watch C-SPAN. If they're going to speak, they go to the House chamber, and of course they go in to vote. But this idea that they're all sitting there listening to the speakers is rubbish.
It IS the 21st century. For heaven's sakes, surely the greatest country in the world can figure out how they can conduct business without being in DC. In fact, it might even be better that way - they can work in their districts and connect with the people without having to constantly fly back to DC. Of course, then they would miss out on the DC cocktail party circuit - cry me a river!
Polybius
(15,238 posts)But the Constitutional also mandates that they must physically vote in person in their respective chambers. I don't see how you can get around that.
msongs
(67,193 posts)Igel
(35,196 posts)What does "quorum" even mean?
How do you handle voice votes? "The ayes have it ... simply because I muted those I disagreed with"?
Filibuster.
Article 1 sections 4 & 5 of the Constitution are a problem. We'd have to redefine "assemble" and "sitting."
And if we redefine "assemble" to mean something virtual, then there's no problem breaking up protests--protestors can have a protests by Zoom.
The self-sequestration of the senators and representatives as it is has been detrimental to the common good and general welfare as it is. This would make it worse.
former9thward
(31,802 posts)No need for voice votes. Just vote. The quorum rule only means something when someone invokes it. Otherwise one person can be the quorum -- that is what happens now. Often on minor pieces of legislation there will only be two or three people voting in the whole House because no one makes a quorum objection.
The objections to this are just excuses to stay in the last century. Plenty of people I'm sure want to do that.
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)This is bullshit.
Chemisse
(30,793 posts)along with social workers, garbage gatherers, school lunch workers, janitors, store cashiers, and the poor slobs who have to stand near Trump every day, just to name a few, can do it, Congress members can put on a mask, sit 6 feet apart, and do their damn jobs.
xyoungblood
(36 posts)larwdem
(757 posts)A lot of workers are working. Have no choice.
Fuck yes! Don't forget fast food workers. Just saying.
xyoungblood
(36 posts)that was their vote. It's not exactly rocket science. But since they don't seem to have the balls to protect themselves, screw them. I just hope our side wears masks and gloves and the Republicans keep embracing the "Hoax," and refuse PPE.
Response to alp227 (Original post)
elocs This message was self-deleted by its author.
LiberalFighter
(50,501 posts)It is about interaction with each member and the different depts and agencies. You CAN'T do that remotely and get the necessary results.
If it goes this way the hearings will be ineffective. Impossible to conduct investigations and gather information.
Interaction with other members of Congress make it possible to find commonality with others. Face to face interaction means a better understanding of what others want, need, and mean.
There is a whole missing when it is remote.
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)like when people are sick, or recovering from surgery, or I don't know, during a pandemic.
The point is, the ONLY plan shouldn't be in-person, no matter what. Because "what" is happening, and the lives of at-risk people are at stake.
It's also irresponsible to tell 350M people to stay home and practice social distancing while clearly not modeling that very behavior. No wonder so many people are behaving in a cavalier manner with regard to physical distancing.
gab13by13
(20,864 posts)to vote by mail. If Congress can remote vote every American should be permitted to vote by mail. Sounds like a fair trade off to me.
Linda Ed
(492 posts)Trump has a choke hold on the Federal Government with the GOP majority in the Senate and Bill Barr at the DOJ, not to mention the unfathomable rulings of SCOTUS. None of Trump's criminal activity will halt before the election unless the House acts in some way. And he can do a lot of damage between now and then. I think the weakest link is Bill Barr and the House should seriously consider impeaching him. At the very least, it will slow down Barr's enabling of Trump as he scrambles to defend himself. And there's plenty to impeach him for. https://www.commoncause.org/.../Barr-Impeachment-Letter.... Our only other choice is to wait and hope for a magic bullet.
iluvtennis
(19,757 posts)bipartisan buy-in and support.
StTimofEdenRoc
(445 posts)and register on line.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,367 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(15,367 posts)Pelosi must make remote voting a priority, otherwise there can be no effective oversight or checks and balances.
gab13by13
(20,864 posts)I know this, if Democrats don't draw a line in the sand and put money in the bill to save the post office, voting by mail will be done for.
Steelrolled
(2,022 posts)Bob Dylan said it best:
Please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway
Don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There's a battle outside
And it is ragin'.
It'll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'.
The Mouth
(3,123 posts)Even the most hidebound of bureaucracies and corporations made it work in WEEKS. It's not like their damned votes or speeches should be kept from the public anyway; pretty easy to confirm any actual votes by the sgt at arms calling to check.
Outside of genuine national security issues EVERYTHING should be readily available to the public.
Hell, the IT team at any good-sized county in California could make this work by the end of the month.