Madam Speaker, I rise to raise a question of the privileges of the House and offer the resolution that was previously noticed. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with humility, fear, and…
Madam Speaker, I rise to raise a question of the privileges of the House and offer the resolution that was previously noticed.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with humility, fear, and conviction, conviction that American citizens have a right to choose their elected Representatives, fear that my convictions will be dismissed as naive, and humility that I am as liable to deceive myself about my first duties, where my strength comes from, and to whom I owe my loyalty as anyone else on this floor today.
It is clear to me that my responsibility as an elected Representative to my community is to say loudly, consistently, humbly, and with love that no one has the right to subvert the right of the people to choose their elected Representatives.
I like Chuy Garcia. I think his reasons for retiring are noble. We are not here to adjudicate the character of Chuy Garcia. I am asking the body to consider a set of facts laid before us tonight about how he chose his successor and deprived Americans the right to choose their elected Representative.
Moral accusations and bitterness are not going to move this country in a stronger direction, but we can't keep bringing these same broken tools to the urgent struggle of preserving our inheritance as a nation.
With humility, I lay out the facts.
One week before the filing deadline, Congressman Chuy Garcia filed for reelection and submitted the necessary signatures for that petition, but 3 days before the filing deadline, he also began collecting signatures for his chief of staff, who shares his last name.
Just hours before the filing deadline, Representative Garcia's chief of staff submitted the paperwork to run with at least 2,500 signatures attached to it, and Chuy Garcia's signature was the very first one listed in the petition. He had at least 3 days of work that he has publicly acknowledged where he knew that his chief was going to be running against him, and he did not communicate his intention to retire.
He did not communicate his intention to retire. You don't get to have your cake and eat it, too. If you are not going to run, you don't get to choose your successor no matter how noble the work you have done beforehand.
The day after the filing deadline, once it was clear that there would be no Democratic alternative to his chief in a D+17 seat, he announced his retirement.
It is easy to get caught up in the culture of D.C., of political complacency, or believing that your opponents are so broken that the ends justify the means, but you cannot win the right to represent people through subversion. All you do is engender distrust in the government and apathy in the citizens of this great country.
We don't have to say that a thing is perfect to say that it is worth fighting for. In fact, we can't truly fight for a thing if we don't acknowledge its shortcomings.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, we are not here to adjudicate the character or quality of work of what has gone before in the career of Representative Garcia. That is not the question at hand.
No good work means that you are able to end your career with impunity in choosing your successor. This is not who we are as a country. People bled and died for the right to elect their own Representative.
To say that you can, at the last moment, submit at least 2,500 signatures, when your name is at the top of the list--and to the question of legality, this is not a question of whether or not what he did was legal. This body does not adjudicate State election law. That is not what we are trying to do here.
We do not choose the rules in Illinois' elections. We cannot imagine every illegal thing, every amoral thing, and make it illegal. Legality is smaller than morality, and the question at hand is: Do we condone a subversion of an election because it is playing by the rules?
That is not what we are here to do.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, true love persists in a confidence, not in your supremacy in making a choice for your voters, but in your service and humility that they have the right to choose. When we start making choices for people without their consent, we have walked away from the fundamentals of democracy.
I feel deeply for the sacrifice that it has taken him to serve his community. That does not legitimatize the way in which he left his seat and choosing a successor and refusing to be forthright with his constituents.
Mr. Speaker, to the question of primary challenges, in both the 2020 and the 2022 election, as I have seen in reporting, Chuy Garcia carried 100 percent of the primary. That does not sound like a whole lot of a primary challenge when you are carrying 100 percent of the votes in the primary. That doesn't mean that he was not chosen in that, but you can't walk away from a commitment to allowing voters a choice and a clarity on what you are going to be doing.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this is certainly not a game. This is certainly not a short strategy. It is long work to remain committed to the primacy of Americans' right to choose their elected representatives. Nothing validates the choice to subvert an election, not the trespasses of an administration, not the long and noble work of a public servant, not the valid and unknowable bitterness of a family's suffering, not fidelity to identity politics. Nothing validates subverting an election.
We are not here to adjudicate, as I have said, the measure of Chuy Garcia's work or his character. The question is: Do you have the right to choose your successor?
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, there is a famous saying in Baptist circles: ``If you don't kill your sin, your sin will kill you.'' Nobody wants to see anybody get hurt, but there are natural consequences, and the consequences of subverting an election and choosing your successor are a slide toward a very ugly future for our country.
There is an argument that has been made that they don't know about it so it is not wrong. That is not true. That is not true. We know about it. We know about it, and that can place on us an accountability, not just when it is politically convenient to condemn someone but when it is in your own family. That is the point.
That is the point, that when there is a spade, you call it a spade, whether it hurts or not. You have to have confidence that Americans will make the choice for themselves. That is the whole point of this experiment in democracy.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The point is well made that Americans are suffering. A nonpayment of utility bills, people having their cars repossessed, people losing their businesses, people going without meals, that is in my community, and that is real. We do not dutifully serve the long work of building a self-determining country by turning our constituents into petitioners who would only demand free things from us, a relief from this pressure of the consolidation of corporate power. No, we also have to stand before them with honor, confidence, and respect in their ability to choose their elected representatives for themselves.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, there are claims that this is not the work that we were sent here to do. Then what gives us the right to be here if not being sent here? There is a premise here. We have to be endowed with trust, and that has to be reciprocal with our voters.
I would argue that there is a very loud demand, a fervent, clear call by Americans right now for accountability and transparency, and it is not just about the Epstein files. It is all of it. They want us to stop this fight and be honest, deliberate, and respectful, to humbly serve.
That is what real leadership is. It is humility and service, not choosing for them what would be best for them.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, while there are many ways to litigate many of the votes, the question at hand is: What gives my colleague the right to represent a community? It is the choice of his voters. Nothing gives him the right to choose his successor.
We cannot walk down this path. When we stand and say that everything around us is bad, it risks us conforming to that wrongness and orienting our policy around it.
This is a false choice to say that I can either attack here or I can attack here. We can pursue wherever we disagree. We also have to call a spade a spade, and that is what this is about. This is about accountability.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, we are not called to do anything more than walk with humility, to love justice, and to work diligently. Chuy has worked diligently. Nothing in that legitimizes the choice to choose a successor or to support gathering over 2,500 signatures. It does not legitimize waiting for days when he knew that he was not going to run for reelection and ensuring that his chief of staff would be his successor.
That is not the path our country can stand on. A country that refuses to acknowledge wrongdoing when it happens has got bad things in store for it. I humbly ask my colleagues to support this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.