Congressional Record/Volume 167/Issue 4/House/Counting Electoral Votes/Pennsylvania Objection Debate/Arrington Speech
Mr. Arrington. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from the great State of Florida (Mrs. Cammack), my friend.
Madam Speaker, as Americans, we believe governments receive their just powers from the consent of the governed. That sacred transaction can only happen legitimately in a free and fair election.
Election integrity is the very lifeblood of our unrivaled system of self-government. The law and the Constitution gave Congress not only the authority but, I believe, the responsibility to serve as the last check on the integrity of our Presidential elections. We either believe, according to statute, that every elector was “lawfully certified” and “regularly given,” or we don’t.
States certainly have broad delegated powers to administer Federal elections, but they still must operate within the bounds of the Constitution.
Despite receiving numerous petitions—to the detriment of the country, I might add—the Supreme Court failed to answer the most important question of the 2020 election: Can entities outside of the State legislatures make election law?
The plain language of Article II of the Constitution answers the question unequivocally no.
The decisions made today in these Chambers are of the utmost consequence, and the horrible precedent that will be established if we don’t act will have lasting impact on our beloved Republic.
Madam Speaker, this proceeding is not just about the integrity of this election. It is about ensuring the integrity of all future elections.
I take no pleasure or pride in making my objection today, nor do I wish for any State electors to be disqualified. However, based on the law, the Constitution, and my conscience, I cannot support certifying votes from any State that violated the Constitution.
Madam Speaker, this decision is not about loyalty to a President. It is about my fidelity to the Constitution and the oath that I swore.