Transcript
Senator Eric Schmitt (0:00)
one of those moments what is before us today is a test a test of whether the senate still understands what it's for a test of whether article one of the constitution still means what it says that congress possesses the power to write the rules of the road a test of whether this body still exists to defend the american people strengthen the republic and use constitutional authority for the common good that is why i rise in support of my substitute amendment to the save america act and it comes before us at a fitting hour in our nation's life america is approaching her two hundred fiftieth birthday we're taught in schools to think of the american founding as though it were unimaginably far away sealed off behind glass but two hundred and fifty years is smaller than it seems president john tyler was born during the first congress in seventeen ninety he was born in the very infancy of this republic president tyler's last living grandson died only last year that is how near the founding still is and how recent this great experiment in self government remains and if the founding is that near then our duty is that much clearer we're not the curators of a dead tradition we are the stewards of a living republic our republic was founded on a daring claim that free people could govern itself not that a free people could drift forever not that a free people could live off inherited greatness while its leaders refuse every hard question not that a free people could dissolve every boundary mock every limit and still expect to remain free no the american founding rested on a harder truth liberty is fragile and so it requires structure man has fallen and so self government requires virtue a republic requires citizens truth and the courage to defend both that's why this bill matters some may say this bill will say these titles some will say that this bill and all of its titles don't belong together that five pronged three titled amendment is just a package or a wish list or a collection of unrelated priorities but that only proves they do not understand what time it is and they don't understand what our republic is the five prong and three titles of this amendment are united by one central question will american law still defend the basic conditions of self government title one save american voter says the franchise belongs to its citizens and voting should be secure title two save american sports says that women sports exist for women and girls acknowledging biological reality over illegal fiction imposed by elite ideology title three save american children says that children should be protected from irreversible harm not handed over to the appetites fashions and confusions of the age citizenship reality responsibility those are the basic truths a nation must defend if it intends to remain a nation let me begin with title one a republic has the right to distinguish citizens from non citizens that should not be controversial that should not even be difficult the vote is not a global entitlement the vote is not a participation trophy for anyone who happens to cross our borders it is one of the central privileges and duties of political membership if citizenship means anything it must mean something here first that is why requiring proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections is foundational it is a minimum requirement it is so common sense in a self governing nation because a people that cannot say who belongs to the polity cannot remain a polity at all the same is true for voter identification we're told endlessly that asking a voter to identify himself before casting a ballot is somehow oppressive somehow unreasonable somehow outside the bounds of democrat democrats democratic decency the american people know better that's why over eighty percent of american voters support voter id identity verification is ordinarily in every is ordinary i should say in every serious sphere of life we require it for small things for lesser things for trivial things there's nothing wrong with requiring lawful voters to identify themselves before before participating in the elections of those who will govern the united states of america honest elections require lawful voters lawful ballots and lawful verification and then there's the question of mail voting for too long this country has been told to accept a system of mass mail in voting as though it were the settled inheritance of the american republic it is not in its current form mass mail in voting is a modern phenomenon and in many places it is a direct holdover from the COVID era covid is over the emergency has passed the extraordinary accommodations of that period should not become the permanent architecture of american elections for most of our history the presumption was simple if you could vote in person you voted in person you appeared before lawful election officials your identity could be verified your ballot could be secured the chain of custody could be protected the people could trust what they were seeing that is not cruelty that is not oppression that is what republican government looks like now of course there are those who are unable to vote in person and they should be helped military voters should be helped individuals with disabilities should be helped individual those who are sick should be helped caregivers with real burdens should be helped those with genuine genuine i should say qualifying hardships should be helped but accommodation should remain the exception not the organizing principle of the whole system because voting is not a consumer transaction the highest values in election administration should be on legitimacy public confidence and trust not so long ago even democrats shared these values the carter baker commission formed by former democrat president jimmy carter and former republican secretary of state james baker iii made many of the recommendations that my amendment promotes voter id proof of citizenship and limiting mail in balloting democrat senators may not support these provisions but their voters do seventy one percent of self identified democrats support voter id a free people should want its elections to be visible accountable and resistant to bad actors that is what title one is trying to restore not the denial of lawful voting but the integrity of lawful voting not confusion but confidence not looseness but but legitimacy i know this issue because i have experienced these fights myself when i served as missouri's attorney general i fought in court and defended our state's election integrity laws against a coordinated assault from the left in twenty twenty the left's dark money funded election super lawyers did not merely challenge one rule here or there they challenged the very idea that we can get serious rules to protect the ballot deter fraud preserve order and sustained public confidence in the vote they came for the safeguards that made elections credible they came for the principle that absentee and mail voting must be governed by rules they came for the simple proposition that the people are entitled not only to cast a ballot but to trust the system by which ballots are cast handled counted and certified and missouri won we defended the truth that election law is the framework by which free people govern itself election law isn't the architecture isn't election law isn't the arcane inconvenience to be brushed aside whenever the left sees a tactical advantage we defended the proposition that deadlines matter because finality matters we defended ballot security because legitimacy matters we defended verification requirements because public trust matters we defended the authority of the people acting through their laws to insist that elections be honest orderly and worthy of confidence and missouri won that fight has taught me something i've never forgotten the fight over election integrity is about more than mechanics or procedure rather it's about whether we still have the moral confidence to defend the elementary conditions of self government because once every safeguard is treated as suspect once every verification measure is denounced as oppression once every effort to secure the ballot is caricatured as hostility to democracy what is really under attack is the public's faith that elections are fair lawful and real so when i speak today about voter id proof of citizenship and limits on mass male voting i do so from experience i've fought these battles before i've seen the pressure campaign to dissolve the rules that protect the vote i've seen how quickly common sense is denounced when it stands in the way of ideological ambition i've seen when the public officials are willing to stand firm and when you do that you can win that is what title i and saving american voters is all about it's not extreme it's not novel it's the restoration of an old and necessary principle that in a republic the vote must be lawful secure and worthy of confidence of the american people now let me turn to title two if the law cannot defend women from men acting as women it cannot defend reality women's sports exist because men and women are not the same that is biological reality it is moral reality it's the plain reality on which fair competition depends and when the law refuses to recognize that reality the category of women's sports becomes fraudulent girls are told to surrender fairness they're told to surrender privacy they're told to surrender safety they're told to surrender recognition and they're told to do all of this so the ruling class can flatter itself for its own moral sophistication the state has no right to impose that sacrifice i have two daughters they both love sports but this is more than just about sports it's about whether the law is still going to reflect reality or whether it will be conscripted into enforcing a falsehood it is about whether a civilization still possesses enough moral confidence to say what is the truth and that's not cruelty it's about whether we still believe that girls deserve a realm of fair competition that is actually their own a serious republic does not ask girls to bear the cost of elite confusion a serious republic tells the truth about the world and builds laws on that truth that is what title ii does now let me turn to title three against a decent nation protects children children are not ideological property children are not experimental material children are not raw material for the ambitions of activists for the cowardice of institutions or for the self indulgence of adults who've forgotten the law exists first to defend those who need protection there are lines that a humane society does not cross irreversible medical interventions on minors for ideological ends are one of those lines a child in distress needs guidance protection patience love stability truth a child in distress does not need a civilization so morally exhausted that it answers confusion with scalpels sterilization and permanent medicalization the burden of uncertainty should favor preserving the child not fundamentally remaking the child too often our ruling class have preferred euphemism to honesty here we're told this is compassion we're told this is care we're told that the enlightened position is to ratify distress with irreversible harm it is not compassion to mutilate what cannot be restored it is not compassion to medicalize what may pass it is not compassion to turn children into lifelong patients before they're old enough to understand what is being taken from them permanently that is not mercy it is cruelty masked in liberation a republic worthy of the name protects children from adult passions from ideological capture and from the fashionable madness of the age that is what title ii is trying to do and that's why these three titles belong together because this amendment is more than a list of eighty twenty issues that the american people are demanding the save america act is the defense of the elementary truths on which republican life small r still depends america belongs to its citizens men and women are real children should be protected from permanent harm if a nation will not defend these truths it will not defend truth for very long if a nation will not defend these boundaries it will not keep any boundary for long and that brings me to this chamber itself americans still love mister smith goes to washington for a reason they love it because they still want to believe something about this institution they want to believe that the senate a uniquely american invention can be used for the common good they still want to believe that conviction can defeat cynicism they want to believe that a man can come here and fight for his country rather than merely manage its decline well here's our chance to prove that hope is not foolish the senate is not a museum it is not a visiting angel's retirement village for proceduralism it is not here merely to confirm nominees pass omnibuses and fund the legislative achievements of long dead men while the living nation loses confidence in its own government the united states senate is here to legislate in defense of the american people the senate is here to draw lines the senate is here to make judgments the senate is here to govern so the question for this chamber is really are we here to govern or merely preside are we here to act for the people or simply explain why action is impossible are we here to use power rightly or merely to congratulate ourselves for the restraint while the country pays the price because the stakes here are plain we see distrust in elections we see the collapse of more clarity we're seeing girls told to accept injustices as progress we're seeing children offered up to the altar of extreme ideology we're seeing a governing class that refuses to draw any line until the line has already been erased and republics don't usually fall in one dramatic stroke they weaken when truth is no longer defended they weaken when citizenship is deluded they weaken when institutions lose the will to govern they weaken when elites ask ordinary people to live under conditions they themselves know are disordered they weaken when men without chests hold positions requiring virtue and enterprise that is what this debate is really about it's about whether the country still defends first principles it's about whether the senate understands what time it is it's about whether constitutional power can still be used for the common good and as america approaches her two hundred fiftieth birthday two hundred fiftieth birthday that question becomes even more urgent a republic approaching its quarter millennium should not be content merely to to remember greatness it should show that it stills know how to govern it still knows how to govern itself it should show that it still has the strength to defend citizenship it should show that it still has the courage to defend women it should show that it still has the decency to defend children article one is supported is supposed to be the branch of action this body exists to do more than simply fund legislative achievements of of long dead men the legislative power exists to make judgments draw lines and defend our country the senate should prove that it still understands that duty so pass this bill to restore integrity to federal elections pass this bill to defend women and girls pass this bill to protect kids pass this bill to show the american people that we can still act in the defense of the american people pass this bill to because these are common sense reforms pass this bill because americans are tired of being told that their most basic moral instincts are somehow beyond the pale pass this bill because a nation serious about the future doesn't apologize for governing itself pass this bill because america at two hundred fifty should be more than some commemoration it should be a renewal the age of excuses should end the era of drift should end the senate should act and the save america act should pass mister president yield the floor