As the coronavirus pandemic continues to spread, even Congress is beginning to feel its effects. Several legislators in both the House and Senate have been forced into isolation after potential exposure, and this weekend, the Senate confirmed its first positive case. But neither legislative chamber has established a plan for operating if it cannot physically meet.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have shied away from any system that would allow representatives and senators to vote on legislative procedures and bills remotely. Their hesitation is understandable. Remote voting would require a formal rule change since the current rules do not allow for voting exceptions even in the midst of national emergencies.
But as the Constitution says, “Each house may determine the rules of its proceedings.” This suggests that remote voting is within the power of either House, provided they follow procedure in voting for the change.
Remote voting would be unprecedented, but it need not be permanent. And, given the potential catastrophe that would result if the coronavirus were to put all or most legislators into quarantine, it is indeed justified, given the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s directive against large group gatherings, especially given the fact that the spread of the virus has already wreaked havoc with attendance.
Five Republican senators confined themselves this weekend after Sen. Rand Paul tested positive. Traditionally, senators absenting themselves for justified reasons would arrange live pairs with people in the opposite party so that necessary absences would not affect Senate outcomes. But in this situation, the mere fact of the Senate meeting is necessarily a threat to all lawmakers and their constituents.
Before he tested positive, Rand Paul had no reason at all to think he had the virus. How many other senators have already contracted it from him without knowing? How many more senators will they pass it to? And how many got it somewhere else and simply aren’t aware of it yet?
This virus spreads rapidly, and it often goes undetected, which means Congress must prepare for its own outbreak. In addition to Paul, two members of the House — Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart and Ben McAdams — tested positive. McAdams has been hospitalized and put on oxygen after experiencing shortness of breath. In addition, Sen. Amy Klobuchar announced on Monday that her husband tested positive. Like Paul, she is asymptomatic, but she has been exposed.
Many members of Congress are of advanced age and particularly vulnerable to coming down with severe cases of COVID-19.
In-person voting should still be the standard. Governance requires negotiation, compromise, and debate. Even though modern technology makes those things possible via cellphone, Skype, or Zoom, these alternatives are little more than substitutions for the real thing. The senators and representatives who can still convene in-person should do so, but those who cannot should still be allowed to participate. Health officials have advised against meeting in groups of more than 10 people. As soon as the CDC gives the all-clear, Congress should abandon remote voting and get back to business as usual.
Unfortunately, right now, representatives and senators must prioritize their health ahead of an optimal legislative environment.
Congress must be equipped and ready to govern and pass legislation that meets the public’s needs. Formally changing the rules to allow for temporary remote voting might be an unprecedented and even an extreme step. But this is an unprecedented and extreme catastrophe. Our legislators must be given the tools to meet it.
