2018: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Might Require The GAO To Audit Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Investigation. In June 2018, Schweikert voted against an amendment that would have, according to CNN, "The House passed legislation Friday that includes language that Republicans say could require the Government Accountability Office to audit Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. The provision, attached as an amendment to a spending bill, serves to underscore skepticism of the Mueller investigation among House conservatives, many of whom have called for Mueller to end his more-than-year-long probe of possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russian meddling of the 2016 presidential election." The underlying legislation was an FY 2019 minibus of Energy and Water, Legislative Branch, and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs. The House adopted the amendment by a vote of 207 to 201. The House later passed the underlying legislation. A conference report that later became law did not appear to include the clause [House Vote 254, 6/8/18; CNN, 6/8/18; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 760; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5895]
2018: Schweikert Voted For A Resolution Demanding The DOJ Turn Over Documents Regarding The Investigation Of Carter Page And Other Former Trump Campaign Personnel. In June 2018, Schweikert voted for a resolution that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "Partisan clashes over the Justice Department and the FBI intensified Thursday as the House adopted a resolution 226-183 demanding that Justice leaders turn over investigative documents pertaining to the investigation of Carter Page and other former aides to President Donald Trump's campaign. The House resolution insists that the Justice Department by July 6 comply with document requests and subpoenas issued by the Intelligence and Judiciary committees regarding potential violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by department personnel during the FBI's investigation of Russian influence in the 2016 presidential campaign. At the same time, top congressional Democrats pushed back against attempts by the Republican majority in the House to force the hand of the Justice Department." The vote was on passage. The House passed the resolution by a vote of 226 to 183. [House Vote 306, 6/28/18; Congressional Quarterly, 6/28/18; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 970]
2017: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against Considering Legislation Creating The National Commission on Foreign Interference In The 2016 Election. In March 2017, Schweikert effectively voted against legislation that would have, according to the House Democratic Leader, "amend[ed] the rule to allow for consideration of H.R. 356, to establish the National Commission on Foreign Interference in the 2016 Election." According to a CRS summary of H.R. 356, the legislation "establishes in the legislative branch the National Commission on Foreign Interference in the 2016 Election to examine any attempts or activities by the Russian government or other governments, persons or entities associated with such governments, or persons or entities within Russia to use electronic means to influence, interfere with, or sow distrust in elections for public office held in the United States in 2016." The vote was on a motion to order the previous question on the rule. The House agreed to the motion, thereby defeating the effort to amend the rule, by a vote of 233 to 189. [House Vote 115, 3/1/17; Democratic Leader, Accessed 4/17/17; Congressional Quarterly, 3/1/17; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 156]
Vote Was Specifically On Ending The Debate On A Rule For H.R. 1004 And H.R. 1009. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Sessions, R-Texas, motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 156) that would provide for House floor consideration of the bill (HR 1004) that would require federal agencies to maintain and regularly update detailed online databases of regulatory actions taken and pending before the agency. It would also provide for consideration of the bill (HR 1009) that would require the Office of Management and Budget's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs to review significant government regulations to insure that they are consistent with relevant laws and do not conflict with regulations issued by other agencies. The bill would define significant regulatory actions as those that are likely to have an annual economic effect of $100 million or more." [Congressional Quarterly, 3/1/17]
Voting Down A Previous Question Allows The Minority Party To Decide What Amendments Are To Be Considered. According to the Democratic Leader, "Defeating the previous question gives the minority party the opportunity to decide what bill or amendments the House will consider. When the motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering the previous question. That Member, because he or she then controls the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for the purpose of amendment. In essence, defeat of the previous question gives the minority party control of the floor and of the schedule for the U.S. House of Representatives, pertaining to the Rule that is being debated." [Democratic Leader, Accessed 4/17/17]
2017: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against Considering Legislation Creating The National Commission on Foreign Interference In The 2016 Election. In February 2017, Schweikert effectively voted against legislation that would have, according to the House Democratic Leader, "amend[ed] the rule to allow for consideration of H.R. 356, to establish the National Commission on Foreign Interference in the 2016 Election." According to a CRS summary of H.R. 356, the legislation "establishes in the legislative branch the National Commission on Foreign Interference in the 2016 Election to examine any attempts or activities by the Russian government or other governments, persons or entities associated with such governments, or persons or entities within Russia to use electronic means to influence, interfere with, or sow distrust in elections for public office held in the United States in 2016." The vote was on a motion to order the previous question on the rule. The House agreed to the motion, thereby defeating the effort to amend the rule, by a vote of 233 to 190. [House Vote 93, 2/15/17; Democratic Leader, Accessed 4/17/17; Congressional Quarterly, 2/15/17; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 123]
Vote Was Specifically On Ending The Debate On A Rule For H.J.Res 43 And H.J.Res. 69. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Burgess, R-Texas, motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 123) that would provide for House floor consideration of the joint resolution (H J Res 43) that would nullify and disapprove of a Health and Human Services Department rule that prevents states from restricting federal family planning funding to a health provider, such as denying funds to a center that provides abortions, for any basis other than its ability to provide health services. It would also provide for consideration of a joint resolution (H J Res 69) that would nullify an Interior Department rule that prohibits certain predator control methods in national wildlife refuges in Alaska." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/15/17]
Voting Down A Previous Question Allows The Minority Party To Decide What Amendments Are Considered. According to the Democratic Leader, "Defeating the previous question gives the minority party the opportunity to decide what bill or amendments the House will consider. When the motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering the previous question. That Member, because he or she then controls the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for the purpose of amendment. In essence, defeat of the previous question gives the minority party control of the floor and of the schedule for the U.S. House of Representatives, pertaining to the Rule that is being debated." [Democratic Leader, Accessed 4/17/17]
2017: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against Considering Legislation Creating The National Commission on Foreign Interference In The 2016 Election. In February 2017, Schweikert effectively voted against legislation that would have, according to the House Democratic Leader, "amend[ed] the rule to allow for consideration of H.R. 356, to establish the National Commission on Foreign Interference in the 2016 Election." According to a CRS summary of H.R. 356, the legislation "establishes in the legislative branch the National Commission on Foreign Interference in the 2016 Election to examine any attempts or activities by the Russian government or other governments, persons or entities associated with such governments, or persons or entities within Russia to use electronic means to influence, interfere with, or sow distrust in elections for public office held in the United States in 2016." The vote was on a motion to order the previous question on the rule. The House agreed to the motion, thereby defeating the effort to amend the rule, by a vote of 227 to 188. [House Vote 90, 2/14/17; Democratic Leader, Accessed 4/17/17; Congressional Quarterly, 2/14/17; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 116]
Vote Was Specifically On Ending The Debate On A Rule For H.J.Res 66 And H.J.Res. 67. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Byrne, R-Ala., motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and the possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 116) that would provide for House floor consideration of a joint resolution (H J Res 66) that would nullify and disapprove of a Labor Department rule that exempts certain state-administered retirement savings plans from select federal regulations if state programs meet certain standards. It would also provide for consideration of a joint resolution (H J Res 67) that would nullify and disapprove of a Labor Department rule that exempts certain local government-administered retirement savings plans for non-government employees from select federal regulations." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/14/17]
Voting Down A Previous Question Allows The Minority Party To Decide What Amendments Are Considered. According to the Democratic Leader, "Defeating the previous question gives the minority party the opportunity to decide what bill or amendments the House will consider. When the motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering the previous question. That Member, because he or she then controls the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for the purpose of amendment. In essence, defeat of the previous question gives the minority party control of the floor and of the schedule for the U.S. House of Representatives, pertaining to the Rule that is being debated." [Democratic Leader, Accessed 4/17/17]
2019: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Refer Trump's Former Personal Attorney, Michael Cohen, To The DOJ For A Perjury Investigation. In May 2019, Schweikert effectively voted for legislation that would have, according to The Hill, "refer[red] President Trump's former personal attorney Michael Cohen to the Department of Justice for an investigation into whether he perjured himself by lying to Congress. [...] Republicans said Cohen lied when he repeatedly told members that he 'never' asked for a pardon from President Trump. Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison in December for a series of crimes including lying to Congress and campaign finance violations for orchestrating payments to women who say they had affairs with the president to remain silent during the 2016 election." The vote was on a motion to table the resolution. The House tabled the resolution, thereby effectively defeating it, by a vote of 226 to 183. [House Vote 174, 5/1/19; The Hill, 5/1/19; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 304]