2021: Schweikert Voted Against The Protecting Our Democracy Act, Which Would Strengthen Checks On Presidential Powers And The Executive Branch And Prohibit Foreign Influence. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "include a number of provisions to strengthen checks on presidential powers and the executive branch and prohibit foreign influence." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
The Bill Would Address "Presidential Abuses Of Power" And Strengthen The "Checks And Balances Between The Branches Of Government." According to CNN, "The House voted 220-208 on Thursday to pass the Protect Our Democracy Act, which addresses presidential abuses of power and reinforces the checks and balances between the branches of government." [CNN, 12/9/21]
The Bill Would Address The Boundaries That Were Tested By Former President Donald Trump, Including The Limitations Of Pardons, Disclosure Requirements For Personal Tax Returns, And The Acceptance Of Foreign Or Domestic Help. According to CNN, "The bill, which has support from the White House, aims to strengthen guardrails that were tested by former President Donald Trump, including limitation on presidential pardons, the requirement for candidates for president and vice president to submit their personal tax returns for 10 years, and the acceptance of any foreign or domestic emoluments." [CNN, 12/9/21]
Congressman Adam Schiff Of California Said The Bill Reflected Changes That Were Made After The Watergate Scandal. According to CNN, "Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the bill's sponsor, said the legislation, originally introduced in September 2020 and reintroduced this past September, echoes changes that were made following the Nixon presidency. 'Just as after Watergate Congress worked to enact reforms, so we must now examine the cracks in the Democratic foundation and address them,' he said." [CNN, 12/9/21]
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Said The Bill Would Strengthen American Democracy, Enforce The Rule Of Law, Fortify The Checks And Balances, Restore American Democratic Institutions, And Specify That The President Is Not Above The Law. According to CNN, "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said at a news conference after the bill passed that it 'ensures the strength and survival of a democracy of, by and for the people, defending the rule of law, revitalizing our system of checks and balances and restoring our democratic institutions.' 'This legislation ensures that no one, not even a president, no matter who he or she may be, is above the law,' Pelosi said." [CNN, 12/9/21]
Republicans Opposed The Bill Because They Claimed It Was An Aim To Attack Former President Trump. According to CNN, "House Republicans railed against the bill, saying it is just another attempt to attack the former President." [CNN, 12/9/21]
Republicans Gesture They Would Exercise Investigative Power Into The Biden Administration If They Regain The Majority In Congress. According to CNN, "Republicans also suggested that, should they regain the majority, they would wield investigative power into the executive branch." [CNN, 12/9/21]
The Bill Would Seek To Restrain Growing Executive Power And Avert Future Presidents From Replicating Former President Donald Trump's Belligerent Actions. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Democrats hope the legislation introduced by House Intelligence Chairman Adam B. Schiff, will curb the growing power of the executive branch and prevent future presidents from repeating former President Donald Trump's defiant actions." [Congressional Quarterly, 12/7/21]
Republicans Argued That Democrats Were Targeting Former President Trump, But Democrats Argued The Bill Would Prevent Abuses Of Power By Current And Future Presidents And That The Legislation Had Bipartisan Provisions. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Republicans said the majority was hung up on targeting Trump nearly a year after he's left office. But Democrats said the legislation protects against abuses by current and future presidents of any party, and is based on bipartisan proposals." [Congressional Quarterly, 12/7/21]
Congressman Rick Crawford Claimed Democrats Were Trying To "Weaponize Federal Bureaucracy Against Republican Candidates." According to Reuters, "Republican Rick Crawford accused Democrats of living in the past, saying, 'The clear intent of this bill is to weaponize federal bureaucracy against Republican candidates.'" [Reuters, 12/9/21]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against The Protecting Our Democracy Act, Which Would Reform Executive Powers. In December 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for the "motion to recommit the bill to the House Oversight and Reform Committee." The vote was on a motion to recommit. The House rejected the motion by a vote of 212-217. [House Vote 439, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against The Protecting Our Democracy Act. In December 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted against the "adoption of the rule (H Res 838) that would provide for floor consideration of [...] the Protecting our Democracy Act (HR 5314). The rule would provide for up to one hour of general debate on each bill and provide for floor consideration of 34 amendments to HR 5314." The vote was on the adoption of the rule. The House adopted the rule by a vote of 219-213. [House Vote 403, 12/7/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/7/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 838]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against The Protecting Our Democracy Act. In December 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted against the "motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 838) that would provide for floor consideration of [...] the Protecting our Democracy Act (HR 5314). The rule would provide for up to one hour of general debate on each bill and provide for floor consideration of 34 amendments to HR 5314." The vote was on a motion to order the previous question. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 218-210. [House Vote 402, 12/7/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/7/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 838]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Making Appropriated Funding Available For Obligation No Later Than 90 Days Before Its Availability Would Lapse And Prohibiting The Deferral Of Funds In That 90-Day Period. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would specify, according to Congressional Quarterly, "among provisions relating to spending and other Congressional powers, the bill would require appropriated funding to be made available for obligation no later than 90 days before its availability would expire, and prohibit the rescission or deferral of funds in such 90-day period." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Guide The Federal Election Commission To Issue Suggestions On Cybersecurity Risks For Political Committees. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the en bloc amendments no.1 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "direct the Federal Election Commission to issue guidance for political committees on cybersecurity risks." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House adopted the amendments by a vote of 218-211. [House Vote 436, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 146; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Requiring Disclosures On Internet And Digital Political Advertisements. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which, according to Congressional Quarterly, "establishes disclosure requirements for internet and digital political advertising." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Impose Disclosure Requirements For Internet And Digital Political Advertising. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the en bloc amendments no.1 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "establish disclosure requirements for internet and digital political advertising." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House adopted the amendments by a vote of 218-211. [House Vote 436, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 146; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Require All Executive Branch Employees To Sign An Ethics Pledge. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the en bloc amendments no.1 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "codify an executive order requiring all executive branch personnel to sign an ethics pledge." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House adopted the amendments by a vote of 218-211. [House Vote 436, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 146; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Prohibit The President, Vice President And Cabinet Members From Becoming Federal Contractors. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the en bloc amendments no.1 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "prohibit the president, vice president and cabinet members from contracting with the federal government." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House adopted the amendments by a vote of 218-211. [House Vote 436, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 146; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Requiring Political Committees To Report To The FBI Within A Week Of A Candidate Or A Candidate's Family Or Employees Interacting With A Foreign Entity. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "require political committees to notify the FBI within one week of any foreign contact by a candidate, or a candidate's family members or employees." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Forbidding Political Campaigns From Accepting Opposition Research, Polling Or Other Information Relating To A Candidate From A Foreign Entity. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "prohibit political campaigns from accepting opposition research, polling or other non-public information relating to a candidate from a foreign entity." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Prohibiting The President, Vice President And Other Federal Officers From Accepting Gifts From Foreign Entities Without Congressional Approval. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "expressly prohibit federal officers, including the president and vice president, from accepting gifts from foreign entities without Congressional authorization." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Provide Informative Over The Intelligence Community To The Government Accountability Office To Conduct Investigations Requested By Congress. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against an amendment to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "require the national intelligence director to ensure that Government Accountability Office personnel are provided with access to all information in the possession of the intelligence community that the GAO determines is necessary to conduct an analysis, evaluation or investigation of a program or activity of an element of the intelligence community that is requested by Congress. It would require the GAO to establish procedures to protect the confidentiality of such information." The vote was on the adoption of an amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 195-23. [House Vote 438, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 148; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Strengthening The Hatch Act By Authorizing The Office Of Special Counsel To Investigate Potential Violations Without Receiving An Initial Allegation And Specifying That White House Senior Officials Must Abide By The Act. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "strengthen enforcement and penalties under the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from engaging in partisan political activities, including to authorize the Office of Special Counsel to investigate potential violations without first receiving an allegation and clarify that White House senior officials are subject to the Hatch Act." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Requiring The Justice Department To Keep Record Of Communications Between Officials In The White House And Justice Department And Requiring The Justice Department's Inspector General To Audit Any Inappropriate Communications. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "require the Justice Department to maintain a log of communications between DOJ and White House officials relating to civil or criminal investigations and require the department's inspector general to review the log for any improper communications." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
The Senate Judiciary Committee Recommended Strengthening Oversight Of White House Communications With The Justice Department, Including Legislation To Requiring Keeping Logs Of Contacts, Granting The Justice's Inspector General Access To The Log And Notifying Congress Of Any Red Flags. According to Congressional Quarterly, "A Senate Judiciary Committee report released on Thursday recommended that Congress strengthen oversight of White House contacts with the Justice Department, as it aired new details about former President Donald Trump's actions in the wake of his 2020 election defeat. That includes legislation to require the Justice Department keep a log of contacts with White House officials, and give the department's watchdog regular access to that log and a path to notify lawmakers about any 'urgent concern.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/21]
According To Senator Richard Durbin, The Judiciary Report Exemplified How Close The Country Was To A "Constitutional Crisis" When Former President Trump Sought Justice Department Support To Overturn The 2020 Election Results. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Judiciary Chairman Richard J. Durbin, D-Ill., said the interim report and previously unreleased testimony, at 394 pages, shows just how close the United States came to a constitutional crisis when Trump relentlessly tried to enlist the Justice Department's help to overturn the election results." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/21]
Current Policies Only Allows The Justice Department And White House Officials To Communicate On Certain Law Enforcement Affairs To Hinder Political Pressure On Criminal Investigations And Prosecutions. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The DOJ and the White House have policies for contact with each other on specific law enforcement matters to help ensure that improper political pressure does not influence --- or appear to influence --- criminal investigations and prosecutions." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/21]
The Judiciary Report Concluded That Former Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark Violated Communications Policies By Meeting With Former President Trump Without Authorization. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The report concludes that DOJ official Jeffrey Clark, then the Senate-confirmed assistant attorney general for the Environment and Natural Resources and the acting assistant attorney general for the Civil Division, 'blatantly violated' those policies by having unauthorized meetings with Trump." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/21]
The Judiciary Report Concluded Former Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark Violated The Communications Policies More Than Once, Even After He Was Reprimanded And He Assured He Would Not Meet With The President Again Without Authorization. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Even after a DOJ official admonished Clark for an unauthorized meeting in the Oval Office, and even though Clark assured DOJ officials that he would not meet with the president again, 'Clark brazenly violated the policy at least once more,' the report states." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/21]
The Judiciary Report Found That The Trump Administration's White House Chief Of Staff Mark Meadows Violated The Communications Policies Multiple Times. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, a former House lawmaker from North Carolina, repeatedly violated the White House version of that policy, the report found." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/21]
The Current Communications Policy Requires That Communications About Pending Justice Department Investigations May Be Only Held With The President, Vice President, Or Certain White House Attorneys. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The policy requires that communications with DOJ about pending or contemplated investigations or cases be only with the president, vice president or certain White House lawyers." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/21]
The Judiciary Report Found That Former White House Chief Of Staff Mark Meadows Violated The Communications Policy When He Contacted Former Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen To Ask For An Investigation On Election Fraud Claims In Certain States. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Meadows violated the policy each time he contacted then-acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen to request that DOJ look into election fraud allegations, whether in Georgia, New Mexico or elsewhere, the report states." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/21]
The Judiciary Report Recommended A Stronger Oversight Over Justice Department And White House Contact Policies Because The Attorney General Does Not Have The Authority To Remove A Senate-Confirmed Justice Department Official Who Violates Such Policies. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Attorney General Merrick B. Garland and White House Counsel Dana Remus updated and reissued DOJ and White House versions of the contact policies in July. But the report concludes that a stricter oversight regime is needed, particularly because an attorney general does not have the authority to fire a Senate-confirmed DOJ official who violates it." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/21]
The Bill Would Require That The Justice Department Keep Record Of Contacts With The White House And Share The Logs With The Justice Department's Inspector General Every Six Months. According to Congressional Quarterly, "One bill (HR 5314) already proposes that the Justice Department keep a log of contacts that would be shared with the DOJ's Office of Inspector General every six months." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/21]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Limiting National Emergency Powers, Including Automatically Ending Emergency Declarations After 20 Congressional Days Unless Congress Were To Grant Congressional Approval. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "include various provisions to limit national emergency powers, including to automatically terminate emergency declarations after 20 congressional session days unless Congress passes a joint resolution of approval." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Limiting National Emergency Powers, Including To Specify That National Emergency Powers May Not Authorize Or Provide Funding To Activities Not Authorized Or Funded By Congress. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "include various provisions to limit national emergency powers, including [...] to specify that the president's national emergency powers may not be used to authorize or fund any activity not authorized or funded by Congress." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against An Amendment That Would Remove A Provision That Would Restrict The President's Ability To Impose Import Quotas Due To A Foreign Threat National Emergency. In December 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert effectively voted against the manager's amendment to the Protection Our Democracy Act which would "remove language specifying that the president may not impose import duties or quotas under emergency powers during a national emergency related to a foreign threat." The vote was on the adoption of the rule. The House adopted the rule by a vote of 219-213. [House Vote 403, 12/7/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/7/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 838]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against An Amendment That Would Bar Political Committees From Compensating A Candidate's Spouse And Require Them To Report Any Payments Made To A Candidate's Immediate Family. In December 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert effectively voted against the manager's amendment to the Protection Our Democracy Act which would "prohibit political committees from directly or indirectly compensating a candidate's spouse for services to the committee and require them to report any payments made to a candidate's immediate family; and strike language requiring the District of Columbia government to report certain budget and appropriations information if requested by the Government Accountability Office." The vote was on the adoption of the rule. The House adopted the rule by a vote of 219-213. [House Vote 403, 12/7/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/7/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 838]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against An Amendment That Would Remove A Provision That Would Require The D.C. Government To Report Certain Budget Information If Requested By The Government Accountability Office. In December 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert effectively voted against the manager's amendment to the Protection Our Democracy Act which would "strike language requiring the District of Columbia government to report certain budget and appropriations information if requested by the Government Accountability Office." The vote was on the adoption of the rule. The House adopted the rule by a vote of 219-213. [House Vote 403, 12/7/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/7/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 838]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against An Amendment That Would Remove A Provision That Would Restrict The President's Ability To Impose Import Quotas Due To A Foreign Threat National Emergency. In December 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert effectively voted against the manager's amendment to the Protection Our Democracy Act which would "remove language specifying that the president may not impose import duties or quotas under emergency powers during a national emergency related to a foreign threat." The vote was on a motion to order the previous question. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 218-210. [House Vote 402, 12/7/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/7/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 838]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against An Amendment That Would Bar Political Committees From Compensating A Candidate's Spouse And Require Them To Report Any Payments Made To A Candidate's Immediate Family. In December 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert effectively voted against the manager's amendment to the Protection Our Democracy Act which would "prohibit political committees from directly or indirectly compensating a candidate's spouse for services to the committee and require them to report any payments made to a candidate's immediate family; and strike language requiring the District of Columbia government to report certain budget and appropriations information if requested by the Government Accountability Office." The vote was on a motion to order the previous question. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 218-210. [House Vote 402, 12/7/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/7/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 838]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against An Amendment That Would Remove A Provision That Would Require The D.C. Government To Report Certain Budget Information If Requested By The Government Accountability Office. In December 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert effectively voted against the manager's amendment to the Protection Our Democracy Act which would "strike language requiring the District of Columbia government to report certain budget and appropriations information if requested by the Government Accountability Office." The vote was on a motion to order the previous question. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 218-210. [House Vote 402, 12/7/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/7/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 838]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Establish Several Limitations On National Emergency Powers. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the en bloc amendments no.1 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "impose various limitations on national emergency powers." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House adopted the amendments by a vote of 218-211. [House Vote 436, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 146; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Create The Position Of Inspector General For The Office Of Management And Budget. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the en bloc amendments no.1 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "establish an inspector general for the Office of Management and Budget." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House adopted the amendments by a vote of 218-211. [House Vote 436, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 146; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Prohibiting A President From Pardoning Themselves. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which included, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provisions related to presidential and executive branch accountability and oversight, the bill would void any pardon the president issues to himself or herself." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Requiring The Justice Department To Provide Information To Congress Over Investigations Related To The President If The President Pardons Someone For Those Investigated Offences. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would specify, according to Congressional Quarterly, "if the president grants a pardon for offenses arising from investigations involving the president or their family members, administration members or campaign employees, it would require the Justice Department to share all materials related to the investigation with Congress." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Prohibiting Using Materially Deceptive Audio Or visual Media Against A Candidate For Federal Office. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "prohibit the use of deepfakes, or materially deceptive audio or visual media, of a federal election candidate." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Prohibit Using Deceptive Audio Or Visual Media Against A Candidate For Federal Office. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the en bloc amendments no.1 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "prohibit the use of deepfakes, or materially deceptive audio or visual media, of a federal election candidate." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House adopted the amendments by a vote of 218-211. [House Vote 436, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 146; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Establish Protections For Elected Officials' Personal Information That Have Been Threatened For Their Service. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the en bloc amendments no.1 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "include 31 amendments to the bill that would, among other provisions, establish protections for personally identifiable information of election officials who they have received threats related to their service." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House adopted the amendments by a vote of 218-211. [House Vote 436, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 146; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Creating A List Of Reasons For The Removal Of An Inspector General. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "specify a list of causes for which the president or an agency head may remove an inspector general." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted For An Amendment That Would Require The President To Notify Congress Before Removing An Inspector General And The Reasons For Their Removal. In December 2021, Schweikert voted for the en bloc amendments no.2 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "modify the inspectors general language to require the president to notify Congress and provide a detailed rationale prior to removing an inspector general." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House rejected the amendments by a vote of 211-218. [House Vote 437, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 147; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Requiring Executive Agencies To Publicize Documents In Allocating Appropriations And Adding Congressional Notification And Reporting Requirements Over Spending Activities. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "require executive agencies to make public documents used in apportioning appropriations and add congressional notification and reporting requirements related to spending activity." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Exempting A President Or Vice President's Tenure From The Statute Of Limitations For Any Crime Committed Before Or While Serving In Office. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "exempt the duration of a president or vice president's tenure from the statute of limitations for any federal offense committed by that person prior to or during their tenure." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted For An Amendment That Would Specify That A Crime Committed By A President Or Vice President While In Office Would Not Be Included In The Statute Of Limitations. In December 2021, Schweikert voted for the en bloc amendments no.2 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "strike a section to specify that time during a president's or vice president's tenure would not be included in the statute of limitations for any federal criminal offense committed by that person." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House rejected the amendments by a vote of 211-218. [House Vote 437, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 147; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted For An Amendment That Would Strike Most Of The Provisions Of The Bill, Except For The Provisions Protecting The Independence Of Inspectors General. In December 2021, Schweikert voted for the en bloc amendments no.2 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "strike the most of the bill's provisions, except two sections related to protecting the independence of inspectors general." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House rejected the amendments by a vote of 211-218. [House Vote 437, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 147; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Requiring Presidential And Vice Presidential Candidates To Submit Tax Returns From The Last 10 Years, Making The Documents Public And Requiring The Sitting President And Vice President To Disclose Their Tax Returns Annually. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would specify, according to Congressional Quarterly, "among provisions related to elections and foreign influence, it would require major-party candidates for president and vice president to submit their tax returns from the past 10 years to the Federal Election Commission, require the FEC to make such returns public and require the same disclosures annually for the sitting president and vice president." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
The Bill Would Require The Sitting President And Vice President And Presidential Candidates From Major Political Parties To Submit Their Tax Returns. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The measure (HR 5314) would require presidents, vice presidents and anyone running for those offices from a major political party to disclose their tax returns." [Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21]
Former President Trump Never Disclosed His Tax Returns, Breaking A "Longstanding Tradition." According to Congressional Quarterly, "That's something Trump never did, flouting a longstanding tradition." [Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Expanding Whistleblower Protections, Including To Forbid Retaliation Against Fedral Workers Who Disclose Waste, Fraud And Abuse. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "expand federal whistleblower protections, including to prohibit retaliation against federal employees who disclose waste, fraud and abuse." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Extend Whistleblower Protections To Federal Agency Fellows And Interns. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the en bloc amendments no.1 to the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "extend whistleblower protections to fellows or interns at federal agencies." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House adopted the amendments by a vote of 218-211. [House Vote 436, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 146; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Requiring Witnesses Subpoenaed By Congress To Testify And Present The Requested Information Unless Forbidden By Federal Law Or Constitution. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "statutorily require witnesses subpoenaed by Congress to testify and provide the requested information unless prohibited by federal law or the Constitution." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Affirming Congress' Power To Enforce Subpoenas Through Civil Lawsuits And Requiring Courts To Expedite Those Lawsuits. In December 2021, Schweikert voted against the Protecting Our Democracy Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "affirm Congress' ability to enforce subpoenas through civil lawsuits and require courts to expedite such lawsuits." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-208. [House Vote 440, 12/9/21; Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5314]