Transcripts For CSPAN Senate Roundtable On Remote Voting Coronavirus 20240713

In the last five weeks, based on the numbers i saw this morning, nearly 30 million americans filed for unemployment. We are already approaching the highest percentage of unemployed since the great depression. Now more than ever, americans need to know that their leaders are working for them, and they have voices as we work to navigate in this pandemic. In a world where it is no longer safe to be within six feet of each other, congress has to learn how to adapt. It is not the first time we have made do to ensure the continuity of congress. With the Nuclear Threat during the cold war, the u. S. Government constructed a large bunker for congress. We would be required to meet outside of washington. This may either first time in the modern area where there is not a physical meeting location at risk, but rather elected officials themselves and others we would be in contact with. We are a subcommittee of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs committee, which has jurisdiction over congressional organizations. Its important we look at this issue on how to govern during these sorts of times. From that perspective, while we wait for guidance, on how to conduct more formal hearings remotely, todays discussion is an attempt to move Congress Forward in times of crisis when we cant meet in person. It is fitting our topic of the day should be remote proceedings in congress, including remote voting. Today, are gathering itself is really part of our case as i understand, it is the first time we have been able to do this in the u. S. Congress. Certainly in the senate. We want to show it was possible to have a hearing without physically being in a hearing room. We are told this is a first are the u. S. Senate. In my view, remote congressional proceedings should never be the norm. It should be limited to times of true and nationwide emergencies, and only when it is not feasible for senators to be in the same place. Any authorization to proceed remotely, whether it is Committee Meetings or the votes should be limited in duration. Any extension should require a vote by the entire senate. Our goal should be to bring both our country and congress back to work in person as soon as safely possible. There are times when that is not possible. These principles are outlined in the bipartisan remote voting resolution i introduced with senator dick durbin. It allows a majority and minority leaders to agree, put in place a temporary voting arrangement for remote voting in times of extraordinary crisis. After 30 days, senators would have to vote to allow that remote voting, otherwise the mandate would expire. Our subcommittee is releasing a report containing both illegal analysis and technical security recommendations for remote voting and remote governing. Illegally, the serene court made it clear the constitution allows the u. S. Senate to make its own rules. The court has a long history of giving difference to congress in determining its procedures when it comes to issues surrounding voting. Based on our legal analysis, we expect remote proceedings to have the same deference. I think the founders would be supportive of the legislative ranch being heard during emergencies. We also need to address the technical issues that surround remote proceedings. In my view, senators should be required to authenticate their identity and verify their vote through an encrypted platform for remote voting. There are several offtheshelf solutions for that that the senate can use to create a secure and reliable voting platform. We have worked with experts and we will hear some of that today. We dont have to reinvent the wheel. I urge people to review this report, which i believe puts to rest many concerns i have heard raised about temporarily authorizing the senate to proceed remotely in times of crisis. We very much look forward to hearing from our witnesses about these issues. The senate would not be the first legislative body to work remotely. Several states have continued legislative business in the past month, including allowing members to remote vote. Across the atlantic, the European Union and plummeted a remote voting for its legislative body. The parliament of the u. K. Is beginning to experiment with Holding Virtual proceedings. While a lot is uncertain about when life will return to normal, one thing should be clear, congress should be able to continue to represent the American People, do its job, even in times of crisis. I want to thank the senator for working with me on this event today, but also on this broader issue of remote governing. I appreciate him working so closely together in a bipartisan way to make sure congress can continue to operate and provide needed support for all americans. With that, i turned to senator carner to his opening remarks. Leadershipu for your on this issue. It is an extremely important topic. I am pleased we were able to have this discussion now, even as we continue to Work Together remotely. I wanted to say i am sitting here in my pajamas. In quitehe first time a while. Be with all of you. My service on this committee started less than a year before 11,attacks on september 2001. One of the planes hijacked that morning was likely headed to the u. S. Capitol. In the wake of that tragic day in our nations history, we start the conversation about issues like how to assemble congress in a secure, remote if they couldnt meet in washington, d. C. There is a special underground facility in west virginia. We are also having conversations about having tests for congress. It is scary and challenging time. The new challenges we face today as a result of covid19 are no less scary and no less challenging. Covid19 deaths through our country continue to grow. It is essential those of us in Congress Respond quickly and effectively. Our top priority right now should be do all we can to tect the necessary support all you can to provide support to first responders, the health care professionals, businesses and state and local governments. They are at stress, almost to the breaking point. Thats the toll this disease have taken. I think this is a good time to restart instructions from almost 20 years ago and begin to figure out how we can make sure this congress and future congresses are able to function through major crisis that might make it difficult for us to assemble in washington, d. C. When confronted with a difficult policy decision like this, the first is this. If its not broken, dont fix it. Look at the rural Emergency Operations center. I asked nothing is broken. Somepose one can enable bipartisan support to enact killings of dollars to combat the problems in recent weeks. I argue those are working just fine. At the same time, much more needs to be done, and divisions are starting to show as we think about what to do next and when. It may be the in normas consent is no longer an option. Inaction is not an action. Allows us to move to the next stage in the response to covid19. We need to consider it. As we consider some of the changes that have been proposed recently, im reminded of a second adage, do no harm. We should not allow any remote Voting System established to deal with the impact of covid19 to be abused to further unrelated partisan goals. If the system allows us to deal with this disease, also used in the coming months to confirm controversial nominees. Even worse than that would be the future Senate Majority leaders using remote voting ever more frequently to conduct routine business so numbers can remain at home states turning to washington to do our nations business. Every single partisan success i have been a part of as a member of this body, and some of you, have come out of personal relationships with our colleagues during our time. Discussions and negotiations in the capitol. Losing those relationships and the ability to work closely with our colleagues, it would never get past. Likely exile away all negativity in a partisanship to make congress unpopular with voters in recent years. If i can acknowledge that there are more than a few questions we will need to confront as we decide what course to follow with respect to this issue. Find out what works and do more of that. Our country is not alone grappling with this global outbreak. We need to look closely at how other legislative bodies with the same issues and the number of states taking bold steps. See what lessons we can learn from their expenses. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank our staff. We welcome each of you. I think our witnesses are martin, joshua. Welcome all of you. We look forward to hearing from you. Productive and timely conversation that needs to be addressed in this critical time in our nations history. Mitt romney has joined us, and maybe some others. It is good to be with all of you. Look forward to meeting in person next week. Looking forward to being back with you, as well. Senator romney has joined us. Without giving you any notice, would you like to make any opening comments . We may have other colleagues who will join us. A few others are interested in joining later. Senator romney, anything before we get started . There we go. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Mr. Ranking member, good to see you. And to see marty gold, hearing from him and the other panelists. It is an important topic. Almost two months ago, i raised with leadership the possibility that we might need to vote remotely, and suggested it was an idea for another time. Im glad this is another time. I wish you the very best in the process. I think we have to have a provision of this nature in place. The biggest question for me is making sure of the Biggest Issue is making sure a true place, aswas in opposed to this becoming a Political Tool to be used by perhaps a majority or minority leader to accomplish something membership at large wasnt in favor of. We have seen the emergency designation used by the president in a way some of us thought was excessive. I think being able to define what is a true emergency and what would require remote voting would be something that we need to Pay Attention to. Thank you for convening this hearing, i look forward to hearing from the panelists. Senator hawley has also joined us. Are you able to join us, and can we hear your audio . How about this, can you hear me now . You sound great. Thank you. My video is not working, but im able to see you and hear the audio. I will second your remarks, mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding this timely hearing on this very timely subject. I think we have to consider responsible, reasonable options to make sure we can continue our work, no matter what the circumstances are. Thank you for pursuing this hearing so we can explore these possibilities. I look forward to hearing from the witnesses. I see that senator langford has joined us, as well. Do you have any opening comments . We are about to go to the witnesses. Im glad to join you. I look forward to the witness testimony. A chance to listen into that. Thank you. I dont know if any other senators are on. If you are, speak up now. We will turn to our witnesses. The first witness has been referenced. Martin gold is a partner at capital counter llc. He wrote the book that is considered the foremost authority on senate rules and procedures, its called Senate Practice and procedure. His expertise is renowned, in terms of how the senate should operate aced on his extensive background in the senate. We are pleased to have with us lower like kelly. She is a fellow at the center for social impact and innovation at georgetown university. She leads the resilient democracy coalition, which has been at the forefront of looking at ways data and technology can be used to modernize congress. We thank you very much for joining us. Isnow you are out west, this early for you. Thank you for finding a way to be with us. We have joshua with us. He is a senior fellow at the Government Affairs institute at georgetown university. He holds a phd in clinical science and focuses his research in teaching congressional procedure and politics. Having read his testimony, hes got a lot of interesting points to make dealing with some of the potential concerns senator carper raised. I would ask to keep your Opening Statements to five minutes. We will submit your full written testimony for the record. We will post it on the subcommittees website. Mr. Gold, we will start with you. Can you hear me . I can hear you well. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, good morning. Good morning senator carper and other members of the subcommittee. Thank you for your invitation. Senate leaders have worked thoughtfully to mitigate the impact of the coronavirus on the chamber. The question is, is there more that the senate can do to retain its deliverance and character while retaining membership and staff . Proposals like yours have made to use technology to augment or replace customary operations. Assuming those ideas are technologically feasible, are they constitutional . Thecore issue arises from mandate that a majority of each house constitutes according to business. Your remote voting resolution stipulates artistic patient by a majority of senators in a virtual vote satisfies this requirement. I believe that is correct. Power ofgress selfgovernance is not absolute, it is very ample. Supreme court addressed this point in the u. S. Versus alan, which was litigation involving in 1890 house rule that altered how they were determined. Later in 1890, Congress Passed legislation to increase tariffs on certain goods. Mr. Ballin was an importer. So he sued, intending the legislation was inferred because of not present as representatives. The case involved the juxtaposition of two constitutional provisions. The Court Ordered requirement and the rulemaking one. Justice david explained congress may not govern itself in a way, but violates constitutional restraints and fundamental rights, but otherwise the right rules to suit its needs. Its up to the house to decide andto ascertain a quorum, proclaim judicial deference to the rulemaking party saying that within the limitations subjected, it was beyond the challenge of any other body or tribunal. So the Supreme Court upheld the statute. In the 2014 case, the Supreme Court unanimously invalidated three recess appointments made between pro forma sessions. The issue was judicial deference. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the standard we apply today is consistent with the constitutions broad delegation of authority to the senate to determine how and when to conduct its business. Please consider the purpose of the coram requirement itself. The framers looked at other options, but settled on a majority, believing it fostered broad representative anticipation in congress word. As george mason of virginia said, in this extended country, embracing so great a diversity of interest, it would be dangerous to distance parts to allow a small number of the members to make laws. Remote voting and virtual proceedings only serve a quorum objectively. With the courts invalidate legislating for a physical meeting if Congress Says it is unsafe to convene . Justice Robert Jackson once observed, it is useful to temper doctrine or logic with tactical wisdom. Failure to do so could convert the constitution into a suicide act. If the senate authorizes virtual proceedings, they must either amend or override some senate rules specifying such proceedings satisfy the rules, or the exception is made for them. The senate must also consider president ial orders that operate notwithstanding contradictory language in the rules so as you avoid an inadvertent impact on them. Mr. Chairman, the senate could adopt the Standing Order that would temporarily override the rules. Thats something you can do if you are worried about the implications of amending the text. Thats exactly what the senate did in 2013 with a Standing Order to reduce time on certain nominations. The Standing Order expired at the end of the congress. Virtual proceedings are not a subsequent norm for senate. The opportunity for senators to interact with each other, party leaders, staff, diminished committees, not function customarily. Over senators have the right to debate and the right to amend. Neither of those rights is duplicated by a process, but allows for remote voting without virtual proceedings. It may be necessary to implement things in phases, like the British Parliament. In this case, beginning with remote voting. As soon as possible proceedings should replicate senate floor. Virtual operations are similar. Even worse would be a senate that feeds unanimous consent to legislate while in pro forma sessions, or one that must convene and has in its conditions if there is an objection or forum call. Finally, some procedures explicitly referred to the needs to prevail with 60 votes. In person sessions with many will have the distorting making those thresholds. I appreciate the opportunity to share these perspectives. Really appreciate your insight. Ms. Kelly, we will now turn to you for your opening statement. Senators, thank you for the opportunity to testify. I work on congressional monetization at the center for social impact and innovation at your town. We are at a Pivotal Moment in our democracy. The urgency to restore a functional Legislature Increases with every moment. Will Congress Join the rest of society, not to mention several other legislatures in the u. S. And around the world, and let the technology enable us to carry on with the operations of the first branch . Where we maintain the promise set forth in article one of our let moreions, or we time slip away as unprecedented taxpayer dollars are spent . As checks and balances go awry . And as americans far and wide look to congressional leaders to inform us, to unify us, and to help push through this crisis . Let us choose the first option. And if you remember anything from this testimony about continuity of the senate and remote participation. Let it be that we can do this. Indeed, we are doing it right now here today. It is hard. We are watching it happen. The more apt question for you is how do you want to operate existing technology . Like this Video Conference roundtable today, millions of americans are moving their work and relationships to online video platforms. You can be sure that this workspace will be different than what you are used to in the senate chamber. You can still get a lot done, and we know some things already. For example, which is the inevitable, lagging will happen. We need to figure out how to multitask. How do you signal or raise your hand . How are you supposed to communicate in confidence with the staff . Figuring out how to answer these questions is now our challenge. Some of them, like Authentication Methods for remote voting and encryption, are already in practice in other countries. We can do this. Even while we are dispersed across the country. Im talking with you today from the cab of a pickup truck with a hotspot from a farm in san juan county, new mexico. Staff helped me make this work. They can help the entire senate. Its also important to remember that the senate has adapted in a crisis before. To be sure, todays challenge is not a technical one, it is an emotional and intellectual one. We require a change of heart. Change is hard. The good news is there is a lot of heart to share. So many people love and admire this institution. We all want it to be at or on the other side of this pandemic. We are ready to help. Most of us in this roundtable probably remember senate, life before blackberry, this is when a staffer could lose a senator on a site visit. That doesnt happen anymore, because mobile conductivity in most of the workflow is the norm. I was a congressional fellow in 2001. I was working on the hill through september 11 and the anthrax attacks. I will never forget the experience of my friends staff, her desk was sprayed with foam in an attempt to neutralize any possible contamination. Officers were evacuated in midoctober that had no access to Important Documents to each other and files to their workplace. Then they couldnt return until january until the next year. For months went by while they worked in makeshift spaces, Union Station and hideaways in the capital. Senate staffers everywhere. At that time, conductivity was maybe 10 of what it is today. This experience accelerated mobile adaptation. Im not refusing the lack of a continuity plan. We needed one then, and we need one now. With this turnaround, we are so much more capable. If i can flip a Senate Master switch, i am sure that this chamber would race up the learning curve. If you give them permission, your colleagues and staff will rise to this occasion. This chamber has nearly 4000 employees. Many of them young and accustomed to technology throughout their lives. Voting in an emergency is vital. Delivered a process. Let us use this time to reimagine how committees operate. Start with field hearings or rules not bound by geography and the first place. Before we catch our breath, we will have built the foundations of the 21st century institution. Think of how better informed we can be within the Technology Capacity in the senate. Imagine a realtime Situational Awareness we can have of first responders, medical professionals. Andthcare Workers Committee panels during this pandemic. This roundtable today, we are on the right track. Voting and remote online deliberations are comported, they will never take the place of in person convenience. All of our most important Life Experiences relationships leverage technology, not the other way around. More than anything else, the senate is about human relationships. They will remain top priority. They will remain paramount. I have confidence in this abiding truth and in your leadership. I stand ready to help. Thank you for having me. Thank you. Very well done. I like your studio. Members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. Atm a senior fellow georgetown university. Today in an unprecedented history. Now more than possibly any other time, the American People are relying on congress to guide us through the pandemic. Rising to that challenge needs processes to continue the operation. I want to make three points about remote voting as a possible alternative. First, it is imperative congress adopt methods for members to participate in drafting, debating, passing legislation to address the covid19 pandemic and process it formally and publicly oversee the execution. Second, remote voting may be necessary, but it poses serious institutional consequences. You should therefore remain strict the and nearly limited to emergency situations only and not adopted as part of the regular proceedings. Finally, i will highlight what i view as some of the best alternatives to address the current situation. The covid19 pandemic has erupted and will continue to disrupt normal congressional operations. It is Critical Congress create committee and floor processes to fulfill its constitutional role. If congress does not, abdicating that authority. It would delay congressional responses to the pandemic amid important sources of information from the policymaking process, and limit oversight. As trillion dollars are doled out in record pace, convening to debate and oversee these programs is critical to ensure they are executed as congress intends. Addressing this crisis will require the input of every representative and senator. Congress should also be wary of potential damage legislating could inflict. This roundtables primary focus is remote voting but it is also about legislating. It involves deliberating in committee rooms, offices, chamber doors. Congress is not merely a disconnectedf members. Distanced from this process. Remote legislating creates several problems. Less room represents senators and representatives. Remote legislating would only worsen this problem. Work worsenly polarization. Even in one of the most polarized periods of american politics. This highlights the importance and value of the capital some. Personal connections have influenced the entire chamber. Been shaped byo the interaction of its members. This increases the divide between the parties. This would protect members from individual influence. This lends itself to in person components. This offers two advantages. It is quick and can be implemented through chamber rules and simple changes to existing procedures. It can safeguard against permanent remote voting, which i see is a danger. Offers the best alternative to safeguard its use. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. Thank you very much. We will now go to members questions. A second round or third round if there is interest. I want to thank the witnesses for their testimony and expertise. He said it is not a good thing that congress cannot convene. But it is even worse if congress cannot work during emergencies. That is how i come at this. I have been promoting this for over 25 years. This is not about this pandemic. This is a broader question. This is also about the possibility of a terrorist attack or other Reasons Congress would not be able to meet. This is something that should be not looked at strictly in the terms of the pandemic but the general concerns about when congress cannot or should not be gathering. To the point about relationships and interactions, i dont disagree with that. Is interesting to hear some people say congress has always personal thetionships and that helps ability to get things done in a bipartisan way. We have lost a lot of that in congress. I can say that as someone who has been in the house 12 years and the senate for 10 years. Wheres a place bipartisanship is more difficult, not easier. Those relationships that are more difficult. It is possible that remote interaction on a more normal bases could help that. Typically off about one third of the year. Do you ever interact with your colleagues on your side of the aisle, much less on the other side during that. The answer is probably never or rarely. Are only an session usually monday afternoon to thursday afternoon. Of the week we have very little interaction with r. Kelly. Some of us take great pride in our ability to get things done and a bipartisan basis. That is the most important thing. I dont think that remote , whether it is the legislation or in remote roundtable such as this necessarily takes away from that fact. There is an opportunity to increase interaction with members. It is thedd it all up majority of the days of the year that we are not in session. A good job did talking about the constitutional issues. I appreciate that. When you did not mention extensively with how it would thethe Supreme Route Supreme Courts rules. Once it is enrolled, that becomes the legislative branches the thought. Can you speak to that for a moment . There are several documents that the Supreme Court has observed in one form or another. The enrolled bill doctrine that if yousipated that says have the leaders of the house and senate who are authorized to , the Supreme Court will not look behind that to determine what kind of procedure was used or if it was properly formatted. It is the same thing that is is the case in setting rules. The parliamentarian and the chair will not look behind that. There is a sense that you should defer to the final action of the committee. Without going behind it to try to pick apart what mightve been this isget to the end one of the reasons for deference. All of those doctrines would be sufficient to create the preference you want. Thank you very much. Ms. Kelly, just wanted you econd here. We did not come up with a new system from scratch. This is technology that is available in the senate today. We are proceeding today with technology that is readily available. There are any number of platforms that are offtheshelf that could be configured or formatted for the procedures of the house and senate. The Tech Industry would be glad to help work with us on the steps and look at what is needed. This is a really hard problem. But it is not an impossible one. Endeavor. E a great the pickup truck that you are setting and, is that yours . Trucks is a 1998 dodge that is used for hauling out there on this farm. It is my sisters truck. I have a chrysler minivan. I am having the full Rural Broadband experience out here. Were you speaking extemporaneously . Were you reading . This is something i will be happy to share. That isa teleprompter open source and available online. You can control the speed. You can start and stop it. I guess it worked. I am reminded of something that joe biden used to say and he still says. Politics is personal. I would be inclined to agree. What i two points that you think you agree . I am not a constitutional lawyer. These are not hard and fast obstacles. We need to do it more or urgently than ever before. This is a always been possible. Wears a point that you agree where is a point that you agree . Some process needs to be done. We need some ability for the senate to convene. I think we all agree that there is little substitute for in person nature and the inperson relationships that make the senate what it is. More than any other legislative body in the world. Driven by social interaction. Beerely limiting it would something that would limit all of us. I agree. He made a very strong point about that. I dont think there is anyone who believes remote participation is a substitute for the senate. So that you dont resort to this on a basis other than emergency conditions. There is no substitute for the actual senate. You are working to do the best you can. You build guard rails around what you do so you dont do this on a casual basis. On what basis do you initiate it . Continue it . Sunset it . We knew it . It . Enew if this were a substitute for , you wouldntate worry about it so much. Thank you. You said members need to be physically present. Can you expand on the way remote work and leadership could relate . Y cor leaders will be the ones who are in the capital themselves. There will be people who are in the chambers who make the rules and motions. There, ands are not if they are not there to learn the information through first or second hand experience, it will be much harder for them to go through the lawmaking process. There, there is a simple transfer of power. Would remote participation allow for regular members to make contributions to the substance of legislation . Or would they likely be limited . They are absolutely limited. Maybe there is a process or technology that would make them more enabled. Be very difficult for them to participate. Thanlating is a lot more saying yes or no. That is just one examination of many. Example of many. Thank you all very much. I believe senator romney is up next. Lets turn to senator langford. Are you on . I know you had another call . . Enator Hawley Hawley thank you for doing this. Lets go back to a moment for a moment to the British Parliament. Moving to a are virtual parliament. What are some lessons the americans could learn from that that was something that was quite suited to those remote proceedings. They had some members there. A significant number of the members were not present. Kind of thing that was not unduly complex to do. That is what they did. The idea was that they would begin with that. As it became apparent that those things were technologically feasible and can be managed. That is exactly the point i wanted to make. For congressessary to do everything it ought to do right at the same time. Are things that can be attuned to a remote vote. That doesnt mean you should start someplace. The reason i said that maybe we should take some care in terms of amending senate rules that have a more permanent character and look to the possibility of perhaps expanding this so it can be done on them more experimental basis. Not properlyare accomplished, the rules will not have to be amended again to take care of something. This is obviously an experiment like the British Parliament was an experiment. I would caution not to go too deeply into the experiment all at once. Do it in phases that can be managed. Consider doing it on a temporary basis. Until one has a clear picture of what should be done more permanently. I am intrigued by your point just now. It raises the possibility that one way for congress to proceed is to stagger our workload. Go remoteot have to for everything. We do not have to do everything all at once. I is wondering if you could say more about which congressional proceedings you think are good places to start in terms of working virtually . What might that look like . The resolution begins with voting. The premise is members have been informed about the content of legislation. As opposed to saying something can only passed by unanimous consent. It seems to me that if you can find the kinds of secure platforms that senator portman was talking about in his opening statement, that might be a place to begin. There has been talk of the difficulty of altering an amendment or making a point of order. All of those things we are accustomed to in normal operations of the senate. Senate should embrace as much of that as possible. If you begin with remote voting and say at least in that sense members have had the opportunity to express themselves in a , whatever the vote may be, if you begin there, that is a good place to start. If you can establish that the technology is available, you begin to mimic floor proceedings to a greater degree. Understanding that at no point will actually look like the normal settings. On voting, could you give us a word about any security concerns with setting up a remote Voting System that you are aware of and talk us through that . I am not a technology expert. I dont know the platforms that are out there. This is really not my forte to discuss security issues. Ofunderstanding that is many the state legislatures are doing this through other forms of technology. Some facetoface communication or taking a picture of a vote and sending it to a proxy in the chamber. In terms of actually voting through technology, someone else would have a better answer to that. Do you have any assessment yet of the difference different approaches that the state legislatures that are experimenting with remote voting are going . Whathat you think of them, is promising, what is not so promising . There are several state legislatures that have been doing this from the very beginning. They are all experimenting with this. In pennsylvania and oklahoma, there were a couple of instances that i highlighted. I thought they brought a novel approach. They are doing proxy and remote participation. Members can participate or watch a livestream. You startn comes when to bring in more controversial measures. Many state legislatures were expressing some concerns that as the process becomes more unwieldy and controversial, it may become more difficult to enact or execute the processes they have been using. Sen. Hawley very good. Thank you very much. Senator langford, when you are available, just chime in. We would love to hear from you again. Let me back up to the general premise here. We believe that the legislative branch ought to be able to express itself at all times. Including times of emergency when we cannot gather or should not gather. This does not relate just to the pandemic. During the cold war, we had a bunker set up. For fear we could not gather. During 9 11, we saw this happen. It was viewed to be unsafe to be in the capital immediately after the attacks. Concern in our country for some time about bioterrorism. To me this is about continuity. And the fact that in the constitution and among our founders, we are the peoples voice. The ones representing our individual statistics. Constituents. And we should be heard during times of National Emergency or times when we are making huge decisions on the behalf of our country. Freefall. Conomy is in we have Serious Health crisis resulting in so many fatalities. As many as we had in the vietnam war. This is the time we should be heard. That is my premise to this. I had a question. Can meet,at when we we should meet. I think many of your are more applicable than they are and practice. Wish there was more personal interaction. I try to practice that. That can be done remotely as well. Most days of the year we are not in session. To say that there would be a concentration of power in leadership the lies the reality of what we have seen in the last couple of weeks. Congress passed legislation just last week that provided over half 1 trillion of your tax dollars to address this pandemic. Think about that. We have significant debate over 100 million there, 100 million here. We are talking about hundreds of billions. And yet, because of the necessity for us to act, and the inability for us to gather, there was significant concentration of power. This was republican and democrat leadership. Members, no input from no debate. No amendments. No vote. Think the notion that somehow remote voting leads to more concentration, at least in the experience i have had in this particular pandemic, and my sense of how this could work as , my concern ise that people would not have the representatives being heard. Is voting, which is the ultimate sacred responsibility, or all of the processes that lead up to that, including hearings like this one, the opportunity to have debate, to have amendments be heard, it seems to me that that would help to ensure that democracy is exercised. What am i missing . What are your thoughts on that . I think you are exactly right. Congress needs to be voting at this moment. And signing or disagreeing on the record with the decisions that are being made in the types of policies that are being passed. I think that is a critical component. This highlights the concern with remote voting. When we are discussing massive trillion dollar response packages, the type of speed will necessitate circumventing normal procedures. The necessity of getting something out quickly means that you will have to obscure is some of the more deliberative processes. The concern comes to when you turn to more routine legislation that congress will have to be adopting later this year. The National Defense authorization act will have to be Something Congress will pass. Or Appropriations Bills or a continuing resolution of some port. My concern is remote voting comes to limit the deliberation you would see on some of the very important matters that congress will have to adopt. I believe that your resolution many others that voting,able remote there are some longterm concerns. Getting back to what mr. Gold said early on. The best is when we can be together. I could not agree with that more. Notworst is when we can gather. And our voices are not heard. As atactical matter, professor who studies political science, particularly the processes and procedures of the congress, a lot of it is about the balance of power. Power shifts to the other branches. This is counter to what the founders intended. Thates back to this notion we are asked to represent our states and districts. I thank you for that. My time has expired. Questions on the technical aspects of this. One of my most valuable times was not on the senate floor but voting. [indiscernible] there are other countries, other states. Experimentingeen in this area. We will find out from the states. It will be interesting for us as well. Maybe to hear from some of the states or countries. This may be a stretch. Maybe we will visit a couple of countries together. And have a chance to get to know each other better. I just want to lay that out there. It may work at a couple of different levels. Much of the success i have had has been from forging relationships. One of those examples from me was tom coburn. Obstetricianor, an , a health member, a senator. Inworked over the years committees. He passed away a month or so ago. It was the personal interaction we had. Do you have any recommendation based on your sustainable relationships in a remote setting . I have been involved with a couple of mock hearings. Some of theto mimic functions of a hearing. She was so generous and happy to help and interested in what is going on in the u. S. There are two websites that have a continually sleep update its continuously updated scroll. Continuity of government is one of the boxes they check. What states are doing. They are all taking steps and doing something. The International Parliamentary union, which has an entire section that looks at Information Technology and legislature, there is legislative data in the u. S. Every year. They keep things running behind the scenes. Congress is a mostly machinereadable organization right now. There are treasure troves of Data Available right now. A lot of what we are talking about has the foundation in place. I thought of the nato parliamentary assembly, which is one of these groups that started during the cold war to bring legislators together. That was a program that was run out of the library of congress that could be brought back. The foundations are there. I was a National Security staff are on the hill and worked a lot on nato. Reasons, the technological and architecture should be considered critical infrastructure. And should be looked at through a security framework. For a lot of different reasons, including security and continuity and access. These are issues that so many issues countries are facing. Part of the problem is congress cannot be a parliament. That is one of the reasons i get stuck. Technologies we are talking about have already been piloted and metabolized into systems of governing. We could take a lot of confidence in that. They will share it with us. I can share those links with you. How to get informed staley on it. I would be happy to yield at this point to one of our colleagues. Go ahead with your question. How would it look to impact andsocial aspect of work the ability to form bipartisan coalitions . One of the problems with remote participation is typically you only call or reach out in instances where you already know someone. I dont randomly call strangers. And then we numbers build a relationship. I see it as a difficult layer to the socialization process. So much of congress is facetoface interaction. Members bonding over their dogs, talking to one another in the hallway or down the elevator. I find that hard to replace in the remote voting setting. That is one of the parts that makes it very difficult. You do not have the opportunity for space for members of other parties to exist. You lose many of those informal touches. There has been a lot of anecdotal evidence about the changing congressional calendar and how it has reshaped the members of congress interacting and who they work with. It is partly the case that members of congress do not socialize as much. They do not have Common Social circles. Their kids do not go to the same school anymore. A lot of these informal social connections formed across the aisle. Remote legislating would damage an already damaged situation. Note it is necessary, i do think it is a longterm solution. Ted kennedy told me a story working on certain things on the weekend. They would have picnic dinners out on the lawn. There was a great story about the fact that eight car pulled carpooled. Just the ability to work across the aisle. Thank you. I have some technology questions. I am compelled to comment. There is not as much interaction as there was. Back in the 90s. Knowent that but i do not if voting will make it any worse. Gives us the opportunity to come together. Wehas been a month now since have had any bipartisan interaction. Outss members have reached to their colleagues. That is the reality. That is the practical reality. This is to be used for emergencies only. Not to be used as a regular procedure. But we could have remote interaction to enhance rather than limit the interactions we have with our colleagues. Probably half the people i represent in the state of ohio are working remotely today. They are in Conference Calls with their colleagues. They are interacting. Think it is appropriate for congress to vote remotely but also have more interaction. The technology there is very possible. I will dig into this issue a little deeper. But i see my colleague has rejoined us. I want to give him an opportunity to ask questions. Thank you. I appreciate the dialogue that we have today. This is exceptionally helpful. Exceptionally important. Are interacting with constituents. It is almost like a live hearing at this point. I had to step into the hallway to be able to visit with a constituent. I was connecting with a group in the panhandle of my state with some questions they had. This is more real happening for us. I want to ask some specific questions. There has been a longstanding and some processes that require physical presence. How many things would have to be dealt with for dropping a bill or doing an amendment on a bill or engagements on any kind of changes that we would have to have pretty dramatic changes in our backup operation for how we actually implement bills and vote on them . Thank you for that question. You are correct. Aboute start to think this from the perspective of remote voting and extrapolate beyond that to all the rest of the Senate Operations that are connected with having a bill become a law, we find all manner of rules and precedents and order and practices that are implicated. A very will have to take good inventory of all of that. To determine what has to be done in each case to make sure you have checked the necessary box so you can get the final point of the enrollment of a bill. And all the necessary steps have been taken. Why is exactly the reason dont think the senate should be going about amending its rules without having given a lot of study to that question. Senate needs the to paralyze itself understanding this. You canfigure out what do at the moment to put a Standing Order into effect and ask the parliamentarian to check the necessary boxes to make that work. See how it works. Let it sunset. Let it be renewed as the case may dictate. Then in the meantime determine what you need to do it a permanent basis. Nothing distorts the situation more than congress being absent. That is the biggest thing. If you have to get unanimous consent to pass something in a pro forma session and someone rejects, where are you . If you have a lot of people absent, that is another problem. This is sub optimal. You have to see what boxes need to be checked. Then allow them to be checked. Nothing distorts the situation more, including all the personal relationships we are talking about, then for congress to be absent. One of the grand challenges we have is that there is a perspective that if only we allow congress to be able to make a big zoom call, then this solves the voting issue. There is a lot of back of house that needs to be done legally and appropriately. That is something we will have to work on. This should be extremely limited and temporary. We also know of moments when the capital was burned down and we had to move offsite. Wartime we have had limited access. This is not the first time nor will it be the last time. This is relatively simple. Find what bills which should be appropriate to do. Get into heated debate on the floor. All of a sudden there is a form call that sets things aside. Advice where you would say in my perspective, here is the type of vote what type of bill that should be addressed in this moment. That is a wonderful question. My own senses it is very difficult to determine that an advance. You dont understand the circumstances that will apply in the moment that you are exercising this power. We are not having to do appropriations. Happens if dr. Fauci is correct and the coronavirus comes back in the fall. Particularly in the time of the lameduck session. A lot of legislation has been left over. It now has to be addressed. No one knows that now. The purpose of the mechanism is to allow for congress to participate. Not just to funnel through the leadership or through unanimous consent. Necessitiesw the for this to operate. What is sub mutation of the coronavirus comes back and fall . In fall . I would not suggest hamstringing the type of legislation ahead of time. Let me give an example of the type of vote that could occur. We have legislation and personnel. We have nominations that we are very behind on. Because we have been out of session for a month. Should it be appropriate to say we are going to come back into session and approved 20 different nominations in the course of a day in a two hour voting block . Moving through nominations even though we are not physically to that point . Would you consider that to be appropriate . I know there will not be partisan agreements on this point. Sense that is a constitutional responsibility of the senate. Advise and consent decrees. To deal with legislation. Is at think it constitutional responsibility for the senate to be hiding from one another. I think that you would probably be better off if you had some kind of agreement between the leadership about how youre going to exercise this responsibility. It is probably better to get some kind of understanding. Thank you. The other challenge we face right now where we have not been able to gather for a month is relatedhave nominations to covid19. We have executive branch nominees that are needed for response to covid19 who are not controversial particularly. Would beelieve there much partisanship around them. And yet we cannot move on them. Because we are not able to remote vote remote discuss. We have not had any such sessions. I know everyone has other responsibilities. With regard to security, what technical requirements are necessary for a platform to vote remote . I am not a Computer Scientist or a technical expert. I know our access to expertise is very significant. A lot of folks who have worked on this have set up whole systems for the executive branch. I was looking at a Rand Corporation the other day about cia telecommuting. Iny had to create something the home office. There are interesting ideas coming out of the house. These are good shortterm possibilities. There are constitutional challenges like using a common Cloud Security for congress. It is very expensive. You can only sell one. That has not excuses not moving ahead on building modern technology systems. One of the places i would refer is the select committee on modernization. 25 of the members are from washington state. There is something in the water there that makes it a literate civic society. Turn. Ould be a place to brought up they hearings. As for security and remote voting, i would suggest the links i put in in my written testimony. Years now have had a hacker lab inside the parliament. They have experienced methods. Mr. Goldman things of it as a of specificic functions and niche needs. Maybe we need Something Like a chamber challenge, which challenges are difficult, and it is a crowdsourcing idea, and i think you can crowd source ideas in the senate and house and share Lessons Learned in some kind of Cross Chamber repository. Up,nother point you brought something we dont know yet is that it is not visible. There is a large invisible constituency. Moving forward, i call it, like, a maker space of modern civics. Amazed at what citizens are coming up with in collaboration with elected leaders, certainly in congress. Ohio Ohio State University is , like, the mothership of all this innovation. Have really amazing infrastructure already, to sort of dig ourselves out of this civic memory hole we have been in. I would also recommend this article called interested bystanders. It was a collaboration between i think google civics, and im trying to remember an individual named kate hunter, a civic researcher, and it talked about the reorganization of mores and how much interpersonal and individualized people desire to interact with their governments. Its really a beautiful iteration of what we already have. Courage ando have know that there is a lot going on out there, but we have not named it yet. It has everything to do with how we are going to organize ourselves now Going Forward if we tap those resources. They are there, and i would be happy to share the ones i know, but i think if we make a place for them to show up, its not just about a vote, but its about a voice. That is why i think im interested in the deliberative process, which is how we reimagine committees during this time and maybe we can bring some of our new best practices down and continue forward with them. I can find you the people to answer the very specific technical questions, but i hope that you continue on with this concern for renewing civics because i think it is there. Thank you, ms. Kelly. Will say those people have. Ound us and we have found them some of them attend university, and i wrote an oped in the New York Times with one of those technical experts a few days ago along with senator durbin, so we are working with outside groups that have very strong views on this and we are focusing on three things, really. Authentication that it is the right person, verifying that, and this is done in Financial Transactions all over the world, and ensuring it cannot be hacked, that it is safe. As you said in your opening statement, this is not too much a technical challenge. You said i think an emotional and psychological challenge, and i think that is the issue. Again, all of us want to be together when we can be. The question is when you cant be, how do you perform your necessary functions . And i would say on top of that, technology and remote interaction can actually improve how congress operates even outside of a crisis, not foreboding, but just work interaction as is done today, which i think has been very positive. Back forike to turn additional questions and closing comments. Again, i appreciate his partnership in this venture as we have partnered on so many other things together, and i think this has been a very useful exercise. I perked right up when your colleague mentioned Ohio State University. I have no one more reason to go back. Thank you for that piece of information. Ive been jotting down every now and then when someone said something especially relevant or toortant, and i just wanted mention, but one of the things i jotted down is the technology that we are talking about should unless routinely necessary. We should keep that in mind. Down that it is to personal relationships. , as we embrace the , and one other i wrotei wrote down is down that nothing distorts the for congressthan to be completely absent. I want to ask you, and closing for each of our witnesses, one or two bullet holes, very short beenitions, this has fascinating. [indiscernible] maybe i could wrap it up, and we will just ask [indiscernible] presentation to us, when we come that we would be able to test. [indiscernible] ms. Kelly, would you start us off please . Mexico . Corners inhe four new mexico. This is where im from. This is where i grew up. Made it to d. C. My thoughts, as you were talking, this is a crisis, but longterma tremendous opportunity. What i would suggest is lets. Sk the Tech Industry for help like we did in the 1930s and 1940s, put aside immediate shortterm profit and go for an eyes on the prize Movement Forward and challenge for all of us, but especially for the technology industry. Moment thatll the we have an article one renaissance. We could come out of this with a renewed understanding of how ofortant the first Branch Government is. The first branch of government owns the real estate of democracy. It really does, far more than the executive. We can do this if we have the bone structure. A lot of it is rethinking and bringing it into the modern era. This has been true for decades at this point. I dont want to lose that. I know we are in a crisis, but we have already got momentum. The fact that weve got this continuity working with each other. We got this great group of people working here on this panel today, people who have thought about these challenges already and can bring their skills to bear right now. Lets not forget that this is our moment to have this renaissance in article one and move forward into the 21st century at long last, as a much improved democratic system. [indiscernible] thats true, too. [indiscernible] thanks so much. I just want to thank the chairman and Ranking Member for gathering us together today. We are in a very, very difficult moment right now in the country, and this is a very, very important issue, how Congress Continues to function. When health risks emerge and it literally cannot convene under normal circumstances, so holding this hearing is in many ways a validation that it can work, it can continue to operate in these difficult moments, and it is important we continue to draw attention to ways congress can continue to operate even in very difficult circumstances. I agree. [indiscernible] i would just emphasize the importance of being willing to experiment with new things. The senate is a venerable institution. It does not tend to adapt itself much to new circumstances. Reminded of the television and the controversy the television in the senate and the controversy that caused when it first came out. It was originally proposed for use in the nixon impeachment trial but never happened. Was when the senate swore and Nelson Rockefeller as Vice President , and then the place was dark again for more than a decade. When senator baker, my old boss, became joint leader of the senate, he proposed it in 1981, and, boy, was that resisted. It was resisted past the time he actually served in office until finally in 1986, the leaders at televisiont in the and then on an experimental basis. It was only after it was in effect for several months that the senate on a lee decided to proceed with it. To tell you the truth, that is very muchence emblematic of the senate. It moves slowly, but if the senate had not been willing to experiment with that, think of where we would be today, where the public with regard the senate as an artifact of the constitution rather than a central part of the government. The senate needs to experiment with this and i would very much encourage it along the lines of the commentary made this morning. [indiscernible] thank you. I appreciate it. To the point of things are changing, we just had another Facebook Live town hall yesterday. Weve done one every week during this absence from washington. Thats where people are. They are online, and the interaction we are talking about members of congress that could be enhanced through technology to my view even outside of a crisis, also relates to our constituents and our ability to bemunicate with them could enhanced not just through remote governance, but remote participation as weve had today. First of all, i want to thank all of our witnesses. A tremendous opportunity to glean from your expertise and knowledge and background. Two marty gold, thank you. As usual, you have your foot firmly planted on the traditions of the senate but also how to move forward and make the senate more effective. As you said, it moves slowly, but weve made a lot of changes. You were not around before the filibuster, but think what big changes that resulted in. Ms. Kelly, thank you very much for your focus on the technological opportunities here. Dr. , thank you for your willingness to share concerns about the need for us to do this in a way that results in more, not less, interaction so we are not going down the track of congress being polarized. Those are really good points. I thought Opening Statements were great, and also as i told you, you have the opportunity to make a longer statement for the record, which you will have online. To that point, i would urge everyone who is watching or listening today, check out those reports. We try to do things together, and we have come up with a consensus document that i think is very helpful when you think about this issue broadly and see a lot of these issues we have discussed today outlined and additional issues as well. You can find it on hs tsisenate. Gov and go to the permanent link, the subcommittee on investigation, the subcommittee we are in currently. Senator carper, thank you again for being a great partner today and showing how we can function even during a national crisis. I look forward to the time when we can be back together in the hearing room and working on our other projects, as we have many that are in the works. Again, meanwhile, i think this was a very successful experiment, and it is an example of what can happen. Be somethingill other committees and subcommittees look at as an example of what we can do, even at a time when we are not able to gather physically. I also want to thank senate staff who made this possible. Reporting studio team, thank you all very much. Thanks for dealing with our challenges the last couple of weeks. This technology is available to others, but it is one we had to perfect and we thank you for your work on that. I also want to thank all the other staff who have been so helpful. We heard from dan earlier. He has been terrific. Kate shes not going to cut me off because im only going to say great things about her, but she has done a great job. Appreciateper and i all of you helping to make this happen. This, again, is an opportunity to us to show it can be done get more information out there, and i think we have come up with some very good principles to apply not just in this situation , but this may be replicated down the line in all situations, to have that tool in the toolbox in case it is needed, to ensure that the legislative branch, the article one branch, has the ability to continue to express itself. Thank you again. Thank you, senator carper, and all witnesses. I look forward to seeing you our mission continues. To provide an unfiltered view of government. Already this year we have brought a primary election coverage, the president ial impeachment process and the federal response to the coronavirus. You can watch all of cspans Public Affairs programming on television, online and the free cspan radio app. Or through our social media feeds. Cspan, created by private industry as a Public Service and brought to you by your television provider. Heres a look at our live coverage to stay. For the second day in a row the Supreme Court hears oral argument by teleconference on a case concerning freespeech speech and federal restrictions funding forhiv foreign affiliates of u. S. Based groups. Thats at 10 00 a. M. Eastern. The National Constitution center reviews the case with legal scholars. In the afternoon the Senate Banking committee holds a confirmation hearing for pending nominations, including the treasury departments special Inspector General for pandemic recovery