Max Rose is doing a great job so far.
4
I like everything about the bill mentioned in this article. The title of the bill, For the People, is wimpy. Would have been dynamic and progressive to name it the Anti-corruption and Voting Rights Bill of 2019.
14
Glad Dems are making progress on such an important issue--campaign finance reform. Maybe this will pass in the next session. But...some provisions of HR1 would likely be struck down by the Supreme Court, which is a reminder of the more fundamental reform we need: a constitutional amendment to undo the damage done by decades of poorly reasoned SCOTUS decisions like Buckley v. Valeo and Citizens United. Until we pass an amendment, our opportunities for reform are too limited.
6
Republicans cling desperately to their tyranny of the corrupt oligarchy, democracy be damned.
Why don't Republicans just move to Russia where oligarchy flourishes without pretense ?
Congratulations, Democrats, for passing legislation that favors Americans and America, not the oligarchs.
Now let the Russian-Republican Senate and their Czar oppose it in broad daylight for all of America to see.
Remember in 2020.
Republicans can't stand democracy.
34
Reading this, I was quite frustrated that the article mentions the ACLU concerns and suggests that members vote against the bill, yet does not actually go into the details or provide a link to the letter that the ACLU sent to the House Rules Committee. The letter makes it clear that the ACLU supports many provisions of the bill, but has (what seem like very valid) concerns about several provisions. You can read the letter here: https://www.aclu.org/letter/aclu-letter-house-rules-committee-hr-1
13
So we now have a "showcase" piece of legislation that has received little fanfare up to this point except for small blurbs today, buried by most news outlets unless it was a Republican lying again about how bad it was for America.
The Democrats need to hit the airwaves and social media with a CONCISE bulleted pronouncement about all the major provisions in this legislation that return us to a democracy. Don't let the Republicans frame this message! Let them vote it down. I dare 'em.
A successful campaign should move key legislative work by the Democrats to the foreground and keep the old topic of Trump in the background. Show America that Republicans have been full of baloney, pretending to work on issues while they lined their pockets and rolled back regulations that protected people and our environment.
Yes, folks, Democrats can actually write bills, investigate corruption, conduct oversight, review facts and data, meet with constituents, visit borders, and chew gum all at the same time. It's called doing your job for the people who hired you.
29
Can we dismantle the Electoral College while we are at it?
18
Call Sen. Mitch McConnell’s Office 202 224-2541 and ask him why he doesn’t believe in making it easier for Americans to vote?"
12
It seems only natural that McConnell would be disinterested in cleaning out corruption and in making it easier for people to vote. Both aims are contrary to Republican modus operandi.
13
" (McConnell)pledged not to take up the legislation"
That's one way to stifle discussion and democratic (small d...) activity.
12
"It also creates a six-to-one matching system for donations of up to $200 to congressional and presidential candidates who reject high-dollar contributions..."
Glad to see the Dems are trying to make the debacle of 2016 up to Bernie Sanders. Somehow, though, i suspect that's not what they intended.
And of course, Donald Trump set records for small donors.
I'm not surprised to see Mitch McConnell and other Republicans going on Fox News to brand this bill the "Democrat Politician Protection Act," and refusing to take it up in the Senate. But are they aware they are all but admitting that Republicans can't win without dark money, secret donations, and voter suppression? I hope Democrats repeatedly point that out.
35
Why doesn't this story get more prominence on the NYT website? It is under stories about Bill Shine and women's soccer?
26
@number I completely agree. There is constant coverage of the dysfunction in Washington, and they bury the legislation that could actually repair it at the bottom of the website.
16
The quote from Abigail Sparberger of Virginia expresses the absolute truth of political life in these United States of Corporate America. The fact that Minority Leader McCarthy trots out that stale old “socialism” bogeyman, and that anybody believes it, reflects the level of education in this country, and why it is fertile ground for the manipulations of the Grover Norquists of this world.
17
No bill is perfect but this bill is a good start at addressing some very serious issues we face in our elections. From voter suppression to assisting candidates of every party who need campaign funds to effectively conduct a campaign this bill attempts to bring voters more fully back into the process.
The bottom line is; the Republicans will never support such legislation as they know it would allow Democrats a more even playing field. Mitch McConnell admits that reality and that terrifying thought for all Republicans.
The passage of the bill in the House is important not because it will pass in the Senate, but what it stands for in terms of voter rights and access to the polls. That is golden as ait gets next year during the 2020 elections. The campaign messaging writes itself.
11
This story should be the lead article on your website and print editions, but here it is buried below women's soccer and Bill Shine changing jobs. Do the NYT editors have no sense of what is at stake in our country right now? Our democracy hangs by a thread, voters sent Democrats to the House to save it, and they're doing their best. The least the Times can do is bring it to our attention.
32
So by successfully putting down this attempt:
"Democrats also successfully put down an attempt by Republicans to divide the caucus and tar the legislation with a resolution expressing the sense that “allowing illegal immigrants the right to vote devalues the franchise and diminishes the voting power of United States citizens.”
Democrats are endorsing the practice of allowing illegal immigrants the right to vote? What is wrong with them? What does it mean to be a citizen if anything a citizen has is just given to everyone else? This would be laughable if it wasn't so distressing.
7
@Jason A.
It seems that the Republicans attempted a classic "When did you stop beating your wife?" strategy.
5
@Jason A. Please name a Democrat that wants non citizens to vote? Is this another "Socialism" Death Panel" to instill fear?
8
No one should ever vote to approve a 700 page piece of legislation, who knows what is hidden in those pages.
Each piece of legislation should have one purpose, no hidden agendas, no horse-trading or pet projects buried inside. Then, we the American people could easily determine what our elected representatives are standing for by their votes, not the drivel that comes out of the sides of their mouth depending whom they are speaking to.
8
Mitch McConnell is a bigger traitor to this country and its ideals than Trump himself (not to mention that he is his biggest enabler). If you don't agree with the Dems bill, don't support it and talk against it, but don't use every procedural game in the book to suppress debate or voting on it because it is against the interests of your corporate paymasters.
39
I wish the House was a bit more thoughtful and could have packaged the parts of the bill that appeal to a majority of Americans into separate bills to send to the Senate.
Let's find out how McConnell would ignore a bill for full disclosure of tax returns for higher offices. Let's see what his response is to a bill calling for broader voting rights. With the 700 pages, McConnell will latch onto one or two sentences to characterize the entire act as unconstitutional or evil of somehow worse than trump. His lies and obstruction need to be headed off through better strategies from the democrats.
7
And you are writing articles about how the Democrats aren't doing anything/this has been a disastrous week for them. Mitch and Republicans of course don't like because it allows more Americans to vote and more easily and attempts to combat the Republican's ongoing voter suppression upon which the Republican party relies for survival.
8
At 700 pages, there's something in there for everyone to hate.
I see that as a major problem with our legislative process. We need to go back in time to have bills only cover one solution at a time and no amendments that are not directly relevant to the bill.
Way too much horse trading going on with "I'll support your proposal if you'll support mine" because that's the only way certain special interest projects could possibly pass.
3
Ever see a legal document? They are kind of wordy.
Too bad that the son of Confederate Alabama Addison Mitchell McConnell, Jr. is the Republican Party Senate majority leader. Mitch is focused on reversing the outcomes of the Civil War and Civil Rights eras. This House bill will succumb to Mitch whistling Dixie and waving the Stars and Bars.
12
Mitch McConnell is not going to bring up any bill that cleans up any corruption or voting rights since he continues to take Russian money for re-election and wants to remain in his seat at all cost.
https://medium.com/@TheDemCoalition/mitch-mcconnells-ties-to-russian-oil-money-db56f16a4824
7
This should have been a one-page bill:
1. Make Election Day a federal holiday.
2. Allow voting by mail, up to two weeks before Election Day.
3. Require transparency of every dollar donated to any candidate. If it is a PAC, then every donor to that PAC must be identified.
4. Demand financial disclosures of assets and taxes paid by any candidate for federal office: President, Vice President, Senate, House of Representatives.
5. Provide adequate and convenient registration and polling places. Make acceptable ID uniform across states.
6. Redraw all Congressional districts with a bi- and/or non-partisan panel in each state.
What more do we need, really? How does any of this harm any honest American?
22
A great package of reforms! The only edit I would make would be to include Congress to the list of folks who must release tax records, travel costs, etc.
11
The grave of Democracy is being dug, year by year, month by month, day by day, hour by hour, minute by minute by Mitch McConnell. - The man who assured this country that no president will ever again seat someone on the Supreme Court unless their party controls the Senate.
Mitch McConnell is a traitor to every decent thing this country is supposed to stand for, but no longer does, thanks to him.
36
So...you pass a resolution denouncing hate, then you pass legislation that says "we want the names and identity of people who donate".
Hmmm...
Just saying, that sounds a LOT like "....so we can publicly berate those we oppose who donate until they no longer do it".
Very democratic.
4
@John why shouldn't we know the names of people who donate to campaigns? It would be nice to know who is buying what elected official and for what purpose. ie. which pharmaceutical companies own which Senators and how those Senators vote.
11
@John Donation records have been public for a long time. You can easily look up this data on the FEC website. This transparency is important and misusing this data is illegal.
I'm not sure what the issue is here?
3
@John It's apparently unconstitutional to impose limits on campaign spending and donations. The only way to directly curb what now amounts to widespread legal bribery is a constitutional amendment, which donors would undoubtedly spend whatever it takes to prevent.
Disclosure is thus the only available way to check the corrosive influence of money on our democratic process. If we can't stop billionaires and corporations from buying our elected officials, we can at least know which donors they represent. Congress would be like NASCAR, whose cars are emblazoned with the names of corporate sponsors. Release of tax returns (which Presidential candidates already did before Trump) would let us know what sort of entanglements and conflicts they're bringing to their office.
As so many members of Congress already lack shame or conscience-- the need to continually raise money from donors who expect return on investment seems to select for that, in Darwinian fashion-- I see no reason someone like Paul Ryan (for example) would need to conceal that he works for the Koch Brothers. For that matter, if the Kochs are intent on advancing neo-feudalism, they should have no problem being open about it and working to persuade us of its advantages.
Alternatively, someone like Bernie Sanders, who does not take money from wealthy donors, would be conspicuous in their absence of "sponsorship." If voters come to prefer candidates without donor sponsorship, that would probably be a good thing.
6
This bill would require some government agencies to report travel expenses to Congress. All spending of our tax dollars should be posted on the internet for the American people to assess. With technology today, such openness is easy and very inexpensive. It will be standard practice some day so why not now.
22
I’m sorry - even distressed - not to see any mention of eliminating gerrymandering in this bill. Perhaps that can be added when there’s an actual chance of passage?
11
@sleeve
It's in the bill, even if it wasn't highlighted in the article. The bill includes a non-partisan approach to drawing district lines
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/30/18118158/house-democrats-anti-corruption-bill-hr-1-pelosi
7
@sleeve I believe Gerrymandering is outlawed in the bill by directing states to establish independent redistricting commissions to draw congressional lines. The article is poorly written and focuses more on the political back-and-forth surrounding the bill rather than what the bill will do for the American people.
5
Dems making positive progress; GOP vows to stop it. Ray Sipe
6
"Republicans arguably have spent more time trying to define the bill...and tear it down that Democrats have spent trying to promote it." This must change. Democrats and independents cannot let up over the next two years -- they need to hammer home the facts about who opposes this bill and why. In particular, they should continually remind people of Addison McConnell's career-long embrace of dark money, his whoring after rich donors and his unbending opposition to finance and electoral reform.
This is not about "freedom;" it is about eliminating the rot at the heart of American politics and defeating the men who enable it.
26
Don't need to read part the part where Republicans have attacked it. If Mitch hates it then it's great for America, our representative democracy, and the people off this republic. I'm all for it. Keep going Nancy!
52
Thanks so much for giving this important piece of legislation a prominent placement NYT! At least it got on the front page. Why not just ignore it and put it buy the legal notices.
The legislation is sweeping in its current scope. Hopes that study and compromise would whittle pieces down to more manageable and precise formats.
The goals are worthy and IMO needed. Who gets to vote should not differ depending on where you live. And political donations need to be completely transparent for the benefit of the voting public.
Let's move forward and debate the specifics to come to good legislation. Oh, that's right, Our Congress has little interest in serving the people, especially the GOP.
Is the Democrat's "centerpiece anti-corruption and voting rights legislation" already floating dead in the water? The NYT could care less and the GOP even less leaving the Democrats twisting in the wind.
9
Free and open elections would sound the death knell to the Republican Party and the Oligarchs that enrich them!
62
This is the single most important area of government policy, because it fundamentally determines the outcome of every other policy area.
18
A Democratic Party election reform bill that even the aclu opposes. Well done, young Dems. And, if I read this right, not a word about Eldridge Gerry’s creation. The priority, it is evident, is to defeat Trump and so-inspired statehouses. The antithesis is to battle over anything else. If you defeat Trump, Democrats, there’ll be plenty of time to fight amongst yourselves. But, not now.
3
Too bad we've got obstructionist McConnell preventing this from being voted on in the Senate. Shameful.
9
“This bill is a massive federal government takeover that would undermine the integrity of our elections,” Mr. McCarthy said in a speech on Friday, in an attack on “this new, Democrat, socialist majority.”
Only in the Orwellian world of GOP politics does making Election Day a national holiday, letting felons vote after paying their debt to society and making sure that every voter is registered amount to undermining election integrity.
I can't tell if they really believe this tripe or if they have no conscience at all and lie without a second thought that it's wrong to do so.
Hmm. I guess if your leader has lied about 10,000 times since taking office, I know the answer.
40
As a citizen I want this to be voted on in the Senate. I think it is undemocratic and unethical for one party to block a vote. I think Mitch McConnell is giving GOP senators political cover to avoid taking a position on topics like voter suppression, and the senators are behaving unethically in taking advantage of it. But this is what I have come to expect from the GOP.
57
They are stacking the Supreme Court so they can back door all their policy. Pretty much everyone but white male republicans is under attack. They will just block everyone if the democrats take over in the senate and use the Supreme Court to attack. The senate is their minority control point.
4
So instead of donating 10,000 to one campaign rich folks will now donate 200 to 50, each being matched 6x1 so now their influence is 60,000. This is going to cost the tax payers millions, the claim that it will be funded by penalties ignores the fact that those penalty dollars could go to other - more worthwhile aims rather than funding politicians..
4
That approach would be painful for the donators and won't it prevent any one candidate from getting too much?
1
This is what Democracy should look like. Bravo.
38
Bravo to this legislation. But I think it will be more effective to break it up into it into individual components and try to pass each as its own separate law. This would force Republicans to take a stand against voting rights and not take the position that this is just a “big liberal“ bill.
8
Of course the Republicans will denigrate and disingenuously label the Democrat anti-corruption the exact opposite of what it is, and repeat their buzz words, socialist, a take over of government, etc. over and over again on Fox in their attempt to sway ignorant, gullible voters to vote against their own best interests.
Republicans know there is no way they can win elections without lying and cheating, and this is exactly what the legislation targets! The bill should be named the Stop the Republican Lying and Cheating Act.
17
From EJ Dionne:
[HR1] confronts core problems our democracy faces by banning gerrymandering
and calling for the use of paper ballots in federal elections to protect against hacked voting machines.
Just that is enough reason to get this bill passed. Long overdue, common-sense corrections for serious problems.
The more I read about HR1 the more it gives me hope that if passed, our democracy can come back even stronger after years of undermining and egregious recent assaults.
22
Was just reading the bill and perhaps i am reading this wrong but Sec. 1004 calrification on requirement reguarding nessasary information to show elegibility to vote. It sepcifies the only requirement would be a signature in a DMV database or on the form? This seems to me to be really inadiquate way of figuring out if some one is elegible to vote... Am i reading this worng?
3
That’s what I used when I went to vote. Are you suggesting biometric data? Any manipulation of the ID would be fraud. And I had to go to a specific polling place where they checked me off the list I was on.
The ability for mass fraud would be a serious undertaking to miss represent people without being caught.
I guess the only group in Washington interested in “draining the swamp” are the Democrats. Why am I not shocked!
6
This bill won't become law now. But it is encouraging to see what the Democrats will do if they control the Senate and House, and win the presidency in 2020. There is hope that we can restore our democratic republic.
32
Could someone explain how McConnell can refuse to bring this to a vote but couldn't refuse to bring the motion condemning Trumps declaration of an emergency to a vote? Is it because that one had 50 senators who could somehow demand a vote? I don't understand how the house could pass something and the Senate not even take it up.
9
I dunno...ask Merritt Garland.
12
@Spyrelx, the way the law was written that allows the President to declare a national emergency also provides that if one house votes against it then the other must vote within 15 days. Pertains only to when the President declares a national emergency.
But you have a point; maybe all bills that pass a chamber should require a vote in the other chamber to get Congressmen and Senators on the record as to their position on issues? The way it actually works is for each house to pass its own legislation and, inevitably, their are differences to the bill passed in each house that need to be sorted out in conference.
6
@Spyrelx It was a specific requirement under the National Emergencies Act. “To keep a president’s party from bottling such a measure up, the law says that if one chamber passes such a resolution, the other one must bring it up for a vote within 18 days.”
That’s not required for any other legislation. The Majority leader of the Senate has too much power, and this needs to be addressed somehow, so that we don’t end up where any bill he doesn’t like is simply not brought up for a vote.
4
You could make the case that this is kind of extreme legislation. What a reputable Republican party would do is propose their own comparable legislation, maybe facilitating easy access to voter IDs that would be necessary to vote in addition to ensuring safeguards against electronic hacking of voting totals--real proposals to be a basis for bipartisan negotiation. But that's a reputable Republican party so it's not going to happen.
9
I wasn't aware that enhancing voting rights, access to voting places and driving dark money out of elections were aspects of Socialism. Huh.
While the bill may need revising for specific reasons, it's overall what the vast majority of Americans want. It's exactly what the Donor Class doesn't want. Therefore, it will be only a symbolic gesture unless control of the Senate changes hands.
89
@MassBear
"Socialism"- get used to hearing that word, because the GOP will be using it a few thousand times in the next two years, regardless of whether its application is correct or not. Such is the state of affairs today in the US of A.
6
It is, at least, refreshing to see that the House Democrats are voting to pass this legislation, even though it is very likely due to fail in the Senate. Working to restore the public's faith in campaign finance laws and the accessibility to free and fair elections is what this largely-freshman House should rightfully be focusing on. Hopefully this sort of legislation will pass sometime within the next few years, if not now.
76
Oh let’s hope sooner than in the next few years!
11