 Thanks so much for joining us to talk about this extraordinarily important matter for the future of our democracy. It's about maintaining the access to vote. And I'm here with Joaquin Castro, who, one of the nice things about being in Congress, I get to hang out with people like Joaquin. I do. And he's told me a secret. I'm not giving him much way, but he'd like to come to Vermont sometimes. So this is about as close as you can get for a while. I've heard good things about Vermont. I want to visit at some point. All true. And Joaquin and I serve on the Intelligence Committee. We sit next to each other and we went through the whole Russia investigation. We went through that entire investigation about President Trump's call to the President of Ukraine. So we've been battled hard. Oh yeah. It's been a very intense few years on the Intelligence Committee. Yeah. And you're my, you're senior to me on the Intelligence Committee. That's right. I think you might be by a term. But this question of voting is what Joaquin and I both want to talk about. And let me just put it in perspective for a few minutes and then I'm going to turn it over to Joaquin and then we really are here to engage with you and answer questions. You know, all of us were just astonished and appalled at what happened on January 6th. Joaquin and I were both present when that happened. And of course, what was so astonishing about that is that it was a real, for the first time, an organized effort to try to stop the peaceful transfer of power. And that's the linchpin of our democracy. You have an election and the people who vote decide who the leader is. You don't turn that over to the influence of Vermont or, as they were requesting, have members of Congress not certify the person who was elected by the people. That was one. In number two, what was so significant, violence was used in an effort to get a political outcome. And we have to respect the peaceful transfer of power and we have to renounce violence. Now we did our job and certified the election of Joe Biden. But what's happening now in so many states is that in state legislatures, what the mob was unable to accomplish by decertifying that election, legislatures are trying to accomplish by the use of new laws that would give the force of law to denying access or making it very difficult for people to have access to vote. And there's really, we're seeing several states of past laws already that are quite restrictive. We're going to hear from Joaquin about Texas. And it's a real threat to our democracy because even in this last election, President Biden won by seven million votes. That was his margin. But if 42,000 votes were switched in three states, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Georgia, then we would have the President Trump, not the President Biden. And I say that because if we start having limited access for folks in those states and other states to vote, it doesn't take much to flip what is the popular vote and the will of the people as expressed in each state vote. Now we're fortunate in Vermont where our legislature did a great job, our governor, Democratic legislature, Republican governor, and of course we're really grateful to Jim Poundos, our Secretary of State, who has been doing everything possible to make it as easy as possible to vote. And that's a bipartisan commitment we've had in Vermont. Of course in the last election, we had the highest voter turnout ever, 387,000. That's in our state, but our state is one district. We're a little smaller than Texas. Just a little bit, yeah. But we're as proud as you are in Texas. But you know, obviously Joaquin and I are both committed to really an open, I'd say the less style approach. Everybody who is legally entitled to vote, we want to make it as easy as possible for that person to vote. That's not the way it is in many of our state legislatures. That's not the way it is with many of our colleagues here in the Congress who are fighting us tooth and nail against the provisions in what's called HR1. We passed that in the House, but it's all about making voting accessible. It's also about ethics. It's about taking dirty money out of politics. That's now in the U.S. Senate. And it's of course a subject to the question of whether it can be considered unless there's filibuster reform. But essentially, we've got a struggle here that I see as core to maintaining the principle that has guided our democracy since it's founded. And that is the people decide, not the politicians, and that election should be decided by the vote and also by the battle of ideas, not by a legislature or a political party. It can make it tough for people who oppose them. It's got to be about the battle of ideas. So Joaquin, I just want to mention the folks too. We've got a lot of Texas legislatures here. That's right. You can talk about that. But you were in the State House 10 years. I was there for 10 years. And you're right, Peter. The events of January 6th were just tragic for the country. And thankfully, the election was certified later that night by the Congress. And Joe Biden took office on January 20th, as he should have. But there's still lingering, just harmful effects from that. Even today, the announcement that Kevin McCarthy was going to pull all of the Republicans from the January 6th Commission, because Speaker Pelosi objected to two of them who have been some of the folks that have engaged in denial of the insurrection, conspiracy theories about what happened, voted against the certification. But in reaction to the results of the 2020 election, you had some states like Texas, the Republican legislature in Texas, and the governor who have tried to make it even harder for people to go vote. And bear in mind that Texas doesn't have the same accessible voting laws that Vermont has. In fact, Texas has some of the most restrictive voting laws already. And the Republican legislature there is trying to make it even harder for folks to vote. And so, more than 50 Democrats broke quorum. Men, explain that. What do you mean? Yeah. So, well, under the Texas Constitution, there's 150 state representatives in the Texas legislature. You need 100 to have a quorum to conduct legislative business. So, 60 or so left the state and came to Washington, D.C. to prevent that quorum and prevent the Republican legislature from basically passing a horrendous voter suppression bill. For example, I say horrendous because they would do things like allow for poll watchers to be watching you as you vote. But the poll watchers were party affiliated, right? Yeah, they could be. But literally, you could have the proud boys and others go stand there as poll watchers in black and brown communities really anywhere and watch people as they vote. And so, it's that kind of tactics of intimidation to try to keep people from voting. But it would do other things as well. It would add criminal penalties if they find that they added all these laws about restrictions on how you can help even family members assist them and go vote, right? So, they're doing all of these things that amount to a kind of a point-shaving effort, right? And that's what voter ID was really. It was a point-shaving effort. 95% of people may have an ID, but these folks understand that in that 5% that shows up without one and in the laws that they're trying to pass now that in that percentage of people, that's how you can keep winning close elections and prevent a state from really flipping politically. And that's what's been going on in Texas. And actually, yeah, in Texas because Biden last only by six. That's right. Yeah, so that is getting tighter. It is. It's a state that used to be solidly democratic. It was considered part of the Democratic south. But for a generation now, it has been a solidly Republican state. George W. Bush in the 1990s, that started the real transition in earnest. But in the last few elections since about 2018, so the 2018-2020 elections have been a lot closer. And there's a feeling that there's a lot of momentum that the state, you can't say it's blue yet because Democrats aren't winning elections, but that it's a purple state and the elections are getting more competitive. So these voter suppression efforts, and then we haven't even talked about the for the gerrymandering that goes on in these congressional districts in Texas. That's a point. I want to come back to that because there's really three things that are threatening to the people making the decision. One are these restrictive measures that are attempting to stop or make it really tough for the people to vote. Number two is gerrymandering. And that's a real challenge for us because many of the legislatures of the Republican controlled and the folks in them have taken many of them, the majority of them have taken a pledge basically that an article of faith for re-election is that the election was stolen from President Trump. And in fact, I was seeing, I think a report of the 700 or so Republicans who have announced their candidacies for Congress, well over 60% have made the major issue that the election was rigged. Well, you're right. And I saw, I think a statistic today, I was reading an article that said that something like 55% of Trump voters believe that this insurrection that happened on January 6 was justified basically, right? They thought that it was a fair thing, which is amazing to think about. Yeah. So it's more important. It's really an existential, you know, one other thing, be interested in your reaction on this, but, you know, it's alarming as January 6 was. And we were in the building and it was vinyl and people were killed. In fact, that person that mom trying to break into the house floor, the woman who was shot in the process of doing that with others, that was 20 people over where I was. I was in the floor right up up and I don't know where you were. Yeah. No, I was in my office most of the day, you know, and, but just the scene there of a mob of people storming the Capitol and breaking into the House Chamber, same thing trampling over the Senate was amazing to think about how close we were to the election on that day, not getting certified. And these people being successful in what they were attempting to do. And the point I want to make is this, that that was appalling and shocking to everyone, the videos that you saw of the mob coming into the Capitol, what they were doing to Capitol Police. And that I think caused the reaction, it was, you know, too much violence and people recoiled from it. But what's happening now in state legislatures is quiet. And that is being done with the force of law behind it. And of course, we have a Supreme Court that has turned, it's taken a radical right turn in reviewing election laws from the perspective of stopping people. If we get these, if these laws get passed and they don't have the benefit of the federal legislation that Latina and I are have supported and voted for that has to get through the Senate, then the voter suppression has the force of law. And it doesn't exhibit itself in the way that the violent attack on the Capitol where people back off and say, Hey, that's not right. So that's one of the things that really concerns me. And for sure, it's really at the heart of that in Texas. Yeah, you're right. I mean, look, the danger is that when you've got these Republican majorities in so-called red states that are going to use their majorities and try to trample on people's rights to vote, going to try to gerrymander the heck out of these districts. My district looks like a butterfly. Literally, there's a district, Lloyd Doggett's district, our colleague from Texas, you know, comes down in this weird shape. There's another chicken finger shape district in Texas. So severe gerrymandering in addition to this voter suppression that's going on, that it's really, you know, it hasn't thoroughly infected our democracy. Then the hostile Supreme Court, you know, the John Lewis. Let me see if I can put our light back on so people can see. Okay. Sorry. Oh, no worries. Yeah. Little technical, little challenge there, but the Supreme Court changed what was the landmark legislation of the voting rights law in 1965. And we passed legislation to reverse what that law had done was say that in many of these districts where there had been a history of discrimination before the local officials could change the law, because in the past when they changed the law, it was always to restrict access to voting, particularly for black and brown people. There had to be pre-clearance and approval essentially from the Civil Rights Division in the Justice Department. And the Civil Rights Division has generally been staffed by people who have committed their lives and their careers to the protection of civil rights. And the Supreme Court basically said, we don't need that anymore. And in my view, it's a terrible decision when we've got to change that. That's part of the legislation that we got through the House and we want to get through the Senate. Before we open up to questions, maybe, Joaquin, you can say some of the things you think are the most important provisions in the HR1. Yeah, well, let's start with a few. When you think about HR1 and HR4, as you mentioned, making sure that we restore the Voting Rights Act so that states can't just change these election laws or add voter suppression laws to the books in their states without running it by the federal government and making sure that people's rights are protected to vote. But also doing things like creating more transparency for super PACs, making sure that there is a redistricting commission that's an independent and bipartisan commission. So as you mentioned earlier right now, what you have is politicians drawing their own districts. And I said that- For the advantage of the politicians. That's right. Yeah, absolutely. And I don't think if you're a Republican or Democrat, then you ought to be drawing your own political district. I think we need to move past that in American politics. So it would make more dark money, more transparent. It would do things like make sure that we have a fair redistricting, which is incredibly important. And so this legislation is going to be key to combating the things that we're seeing going on in places like Texas and Georgia and Arizona and so many other places. And in Texas, it has been bad for a long time. In 2011, when the Texas legislature passed its latest round of maps, for example, a federal court found that the Texas legislature intentionally, not accidentally or negligently, but intentionally discriminated against minority voters in how it drew its maps, that there was intentional discrimination. Oh yeah. And so that's what we're dealing with in a place like Texas. And so there's a lot at stake for us and for people in many other states. You know, I really think it's important for us in Vermont to appreciate that. You know, as you heard in my opening remarks, we're very fortunate because we've had a long tradition bipartisan of really encouraging making it easy for folks to vote. And that's how it should be, by the way. You know, I get kudos to the folks in Vermont who have created that system. But if you can't vote fairly in Texas and you get vote suppressed, that's going to affect us in Vermont. It affects the outcome of the composition of Congress and the presidential election. So, you know, we want to do everything we can. And before we sign off tonight, I'm going to, in our team, we're going to give folks some suggestions on things that you can do. You know, I think we're at a point where folks want to ask some questions. We're glad to, we're glad to take them Natalie from my office is handling the questions. And I think you can type them in and she'll feel them and and Joaquin and I'll do our best to address your questions and hear your comments. I'll give you the hard ones, Peter. All right. Stanford, Stanford College and Harvard Law. I think, I think we know who can take the heart. And I have a good friend that went to Middlebury, too. Really? All right. I will start to read out some of the questions. I'm Natalie from Team Welch. So for folks who just joined a little while ago, please keep some in your questions and we will try and get to them all. We're getting a lot of questions about the filibuster. And so this first one is really for both of you. Is there anything you in the house can do? This is from Anita. Is there anything you can do in the house to influence Democratic colleagues in the Senate already eliminating the filibuster? This is no longer a Democratic against Republican issue. This is a Democrat democracy issue. So I'll let you guys take that one. Well, I think all of us, we can encourage our colleagues. You know, in Vermont, we've got Bernie and Patrick and I think both of them have given statements indicating that they're supportive of kind of ending what has been an incredible abuse of the filibuster. But as you know, it's going to come down to just a couple of senators who have to make that decision. I don't hear about Joe Manchin a lot and we hear about Kristen Sinema. But all of us can talk to our colleagues, but you can write to those members too. Yeah. I mean, you know, as you were talking about your senators and how they're both on board, obviously to help on voting rights, but to waive the filibuster and specifically to waive the filibuster when it comes to protecting people's voting rights and protecting our democracy, it made me think that I wish that politics was like sports. I wish that I could trade you, say Ted Cruz for Bernie Sanders or John Cornyn for Patrick Leahy. One of those. I know that I know that you would never accept those trades, but I'd still like to be able to do it. Yeah. I mean, look, you know, in Texas, we've got John Cornyn, Ted Cruz, two pretty hard right senators. But we can both personally, wherever we're from, reach out to them and to their offices, make our case publicly, obviously, that there's so much at stake here. And again, you know, even if you don't make an exception in the filibuster for immigration, which has been a longstanding issue that people worked on for a long time or for healthcare or for anything else, infrastructure, for example, there ought to be an exception for protecting people's voting rights. And by the way, Republicans made exceptions when it came to the Supreme Court nominees that they wanted to get on board. So it's not like, and the filibuster wasn't always the same number of votes that you need now. And so we should absolutely be willing to do it. Yeah. You know, Joaquin, one thing that I think it's worth talking about is why is it that our Republican colleagues here in DC are so dead set against the For the People Act? And therefore limiting access. And, you know, in DC, it's totally different than talking to Vermont, Texas, we've got a pre-conservative Republican Party. But, you know, the reality is down here, they fear the vote, because basically, if you get the vote, then we're going to have a lot of policies that help work in families and aren't so lenient and beneficial to corporations. And that's really what's been happening down here. And you even saw when McConnell was the majority leader, he used that reconciliation process and then run around the filibuster to get those two trillion dollars in tax cuts that went. That's absolutely right. Basically to corporations. And when the wealthiest people, I mean, literally the very wealthiest people in the country. And yeah, I mean, so that is a challenge. It's getting the senators ultimately to agree to using or to waiving the filibuster to allow HR1 and hopefully HR4 to actually pass. I've got another question for you both. This is from William and he asks, so many of the new restrictive laws seem to be written that they can only be challenged in the courts after their fact. Is there any way to challenge them prior to the next election? Well, and that's the importance of that pre-clearance requirement on a lot of this stuff. That's why passing this federal legislation is so important because it would require some of those proposals to be run by the federal government. And you think about particularly in my part of the country, Texas is interesting. Some folks consider it still part of the South. Some people consider it more Southwest. I think it's kind of a combination of both. But the history in the Southern United States in particular, and the trampling of voting rights of African Americans, of Mexican Americans, and others, there's a long history there. And so we need all the help that we can get in finding back against that. Well, that's the point of the federal legislation. Under the Constitution, when it comes to federal office, it's the Congress that has the final set. Now, elections can be administered locally, but when it comes to federal elections, the Congress has the right to establish standards and our standards are basically access for folks who are qualified to vote. And not these restrictions that you're seeing in Georgia and that Joaquin described in Texas. So this is like an existential question for our democracy. And it's about whether, as I said in the beginning, it's about whether people decide. But there's a lot at stake because the policies here right now, we're considering the COVID relief, the child care tax credit that is going to lift half of the kids out of poverty who are in poverty, our ability to address climate change, which everybody knows. Just look at what the weather is. All of these things that require governmental action. If we don't have democracy where everybody who can vote does vote, then we're not going to have a say in what those policies are. The energy companies will run rampant, the tax burden will continue to increase on working families and continue to be diminished on corporations and the very wealth. So there's a lot at stake here. And you know, you asked a question earlier, there was a question about why Republicans in particular are not for something like HR1. And unfortunately it's true that you've got very conservative Republicans in many states that now in a place like Texas, they're no longer trying to win elections by governing well or proposing new ideas. A big part of their strategy is to win elections by point shading, by making it harder for the people who ordinarily vote against them to actually cast a ballot and vote against them. And this is a core piece of their strategy and HR1 and HR4 would combat that. On that point, we'd have, I have one question about HR4. When is HR4 going to be coming to the floor? Hopefully soon. We want to make sure, remember, HR1 has passed the House, but HR4 has not passed the House. And we need to make sure that we get that done. The next question here is a kind of a combination of two questions, one from Marianne and then one from Patricia. And it's, if the Senate doesn't get to S1 this summer, would there be a way to counteract the gerrymandering created? These people know a lot about this. This is great. Created based on the new census data, if the John Lewis Voting Rights Act does manage to get passed into law. Yeah, I believe so. I believe that if we're able to get those things done by the fall, I think that we have a shot. Remember, the legislatures of the country, in other words, the different state legislatures are going to be passing their maps at different times. For example, in Texas, I believe we're supposed to get our data in August. And then the Texas, the governor will call a special session after that so that the Texas legislature can draw these congressional maps. So it's my hope that at least by early fall, we can pass this stuff and give ourselves a shot at being able to block any of this egregious, horrible gerrymandering from happening again, because it's happened repeatedly now, every decade. And I was part of a situation in Texas where Republicans tried to do it twice in one decade because they didn't like the way the people of Texas voted in the congressional elections of 2002. And so they did redistricting. Tom DeLay did redistricting in 2003. So we absolutely need to get this done. Yeah, we're fortunate in Vermont. We don't have a redistricting problem. My district, it looks a little bit like the map of Vermont. You've got the whole stage. It is the map of Vermont. But that question is really right on. If we're able to pass this legislation, it applies to the state. So whatever they may have passed in Georgia or in Texas, the federal law would prevail as to these federal elections. So there would be a basis for immediate relief in court. Now, we have to deal with the courts that are returning against this. I mean, that's a burden. But there would be a legal basis for the enforceability of the HR1 provisions or the John Lewis provisions. So it's really, really essential that we get this passed. I've got a question here from Adrian specifically for Congressman Castro. And they're asking, are the Texas Democrats, what they're doing, will it work? Did it work when he did it in 2003? That's a great question. In 2003, what we were facing when we left, we left Ardmore, Oklahoma for four days, state reps did. And then in the second special session, the state senators left for 34 days. And we were able to hold off that re-redistricting for a few months. But ultimately, the Republicans passed those maps. And that litigation ended up in court for years and years, literally for eight, nine years after those maps were drawn. Same thing in the next decade. And so the difference between 2003, when I left the state as a state rep and 2020, is that in 2021, is that in 2021, you now have a Democratic president, a Democratic Senate, and a Democratic House of Representatives here in Washington that can pass legislation to address the problem. And so what the state reps from Texas are doing can actually be successful as part of the chorus of voices, and really in many ways taking the lead for the country in urging our Democratic senators, again, to carve out an exception to the filibuster to protect people's voting rights. So you ask the question, can it work? It can absolutely work. It can absolutely be effective. As Democrats, we're in control of the White House and the Congress right now. So we can get this done. By the way, I did notice Joe Manchin, who is a conservative Democrat, but expressed concern about the filibuster, two things. One, I thought he did indicate some openness to a parable. And number two, he put forward his own voting rights bill that contains several provisions that are quite important in HR1. And if we need any higher validation, it was really endorsed by Stacey Abrams. So I'd be interested in your thoughts on Stacey Abrams endorsing some of the suggestions Manchin was making about a voting rights bill that would incorporate so many of the provisions of the chair. Yeah, well, I think for Stacey, it was an incredible work on voting rights. One of the leaders in the country on this, I think she recognized that it was a necessary and reasonable compromise given the dynamics of the United States Senate, given the fact that we had a slim majority when you had the vice president's vote. And yet what you saw right away was that when she endorsed it, you had a Republican press conference where they all jumped on it and said, oh, this is no longer the Joe Manchin proposal. This is the Stacey Abrams proposal. It says if they were looking for really any reason to say, hey, even this, even this, that a conservative Democrat like Joe Manchin has proposed is unacceptable. And it makes you wonder then, is there anything that's acceptable to them that would protect people's voting rights? And I kind of think at this point, the answer is no. And that's why it's imperative that folks like Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema and others, you know, get on board with making an exception of the tool buster to protect voting rights. You know, one of the things that's so different here, Joaquin, from when I served in the state Senate in Vermont, we had really contested elections, I served in the minority, I served in the majority. But when the elections were over, everybody understood they had an obligation to try to do things that were beneficial to Vermont. That's not the M.O. of Senator McConnell. Remember when President Biden was first elected, Senator McConnell said himself, his job, as he saw it, was to make Obama a one-term president. And he had an insight that unfortunately turned out to be true, that if he could throw sand in the gears and do everything possible to stop things from happening, the party in power would get blamed for it, even though he was the one who crossed it. And we've got some colleagues now that are saying that constantly. I mean, Chip Royer, I think that's... Yeah, that's right. Chips is not a neighboring district of mine. He says chaos. He wants chaos. And then people throw their hands up. Which, by the way, is another reason sometimes people decide, hey, it's not worth it to vote because they see that spectrum. Yeah, you're right. So important. What it does, I think it adds to people's frustration with politics generally. Yeah. And they tend to disengage at that point. But it is interesting psychologically that even though the other side is doing everything they can to obstruct and create chaos, sometimes even your voters, if you don't get something done, they hold it against you. Even though it's maybe the opposition that's preventing you from doing it, they hold it against you. And so understanding that, that's why it's important that we get these things done, that we protect voting rights, that we get infrastructure done, that we get immigration done, that we deliver on the things that we have promised in campaigns for years. And I'm feeling pretty good about our unit to that principle that you just said. Yeah, I think the overwhelming majority of Democrats believe that. I'm hoping that by the end, 100% of Democrats in the House and the Senate will, you know, will believe that that's the best path for us. Going into 2020, 22, but most of all, because it's the right thing to do for the American people. Right. I've got a question here for Congressman Welch. This is from Karen. What can Vermonters do to advocate for voting rights when our delegation is already working so hard to pass HR1? How do we help other states like Texas? Well, I think there's a number of things. First of all, I think it's good for everybody to check in with any of the senators who are on the fence. But actually, the Democratic senators are not on the fence. I don't think there's anybody on the Democratic side. So you can encourage particularly people like Senator Manchin and Senator Sinema. The other thing, really, this is grassroots. The more you talk about this to your friends, even if it's friends that are you think already on board, you use a nice word. There's a chorus that's got to rise up here that really is going to make an impact ultimately on what our ability to maintain the vote. Volunteer or donating. And there's a number of organizations. And, Natalie, you can put some of these up on the screen. But somebody like Stacey Abrams, in the work that she did, it probably made the difference in those two Senate races. And that thing of difference in us having 50 senators with the vice president casting the entire rating vote, I think. Yeah. Oh, no, no. The work and the work of the people in Georgia really helped save us. Yeah. So you've got Texas right to vote, which is a good meeting voucher for that. But that's a good place where people might make contributions. And the Black Voters Matter is doing tremendous work. Texas Civil Rights Project, People First, Fair Fight, the New Georgia Project. So, Natalie, maybe you can put some of those on the screen where if people want to contribute, they have places where they can do that. Yeah. I'm going to put all of these organizations in the chat box so that when you guys are done here, you guys can take a look and volunteer or donate if you can. But right now, we're going to ask a couple more questions. Here's a question from Jeb. And Jeb is asking a question that a couple of folks have asked, which is centering around the overturning of election results. If we don't pass the For the People Act this summer and the maps get redrawn, it seems like we might lose the midterms in 2022. And states will be able to override election results in 2024 no matter who the people vote for. Is this something we need to be concerned about? So maybe both of you guys can do some background explaining what that issue is, because I'm not sure everyone knows about that problem. Well, I'll start. We're going to go to Joaquin. But two of the most radical provisions I've heard about are letting partisans be poll watchers. And Joaquin talked about that earlier. So it literally could be Trump partisans or the proud boys. And they would be looking over your shoulder almost when you're voting. It would be real intimidation. We've never, ever had that. And that obviously would have a real impact. But a second thing that is truly astonishing, you've seen this being fought out in Georgia, is the legislature basically wants to script the secretary of state of the responsibility the secretary of state has for the elections. And then delegate that to a panel that's either appointed by a partisan legislature or give that authority to the legislature itself. So what it would in effect mean is that whatever the vote count was, a partisan legislature could have its own capacity to overturn that election and elect the person they preferred. And that's essentially what was the effort that was being done here in Washington with the effort to not certify President Biden. Okay, that would be long. The game plan there was to not certify him and then try to have Congress vote to change the outcome. And I think there's concern that in the midterms, if you lose the midterms of Democrats, if you lose the Senate, if you lose the House, and Joe Biden gets reelected, for example, in 2024, that you get to January 2025. And now with a Republican Congress, they refuse to certify the election. And they want to vote to install a Republican president. I mean, that's like the worst nightmare, the bottom of the barrel fear. But look, you know, before, well, yeah, that's a thing. It's headed. The craziness is headed in that direction. And, you know, it's one of those things where you want to be able to just dismiss it and think, well, it's just a conspiracy and come on, they're not actually going to do that. But when you have an attempted coup at the United States Capitol, and then the same night, you have a lot of Republicans vote not to certify the election. That's right. I mean, the majority of Republicans vote not to certify the election. And the crazy just keeps getting crazier. You have to acknowledge that that is a concern that it's on your radar. And that's a very, you know, in many ways, shocking and sad thing to say. But it's also something, unfortunately, that's got to be on a radar. Yeah. And, you know, attacking the vote has been used before to maintain power is what happened, you know, after the Civil War, we have reconstruction. And we had a period in this history where African Americans, formerly enslaved people were allowed to vote. And there was an enormous, a civic uprising and flowering among formerly enslaved people. People went to Congress. They were in state legislatures. They were creating civic organizations. And then there was the reaction to that. And the backlash, yeah. The backlash and then the deal in the left in the Hays-Tilvin election where the federal troops that were providing some guarantee of protection, some guarantee because there was still an awful lot of violence left. And the deal was that in exchange for federal troops leaving and essentially abandoning the reconstruction, the PACE was accepted as the president. And then what happened, Jim Crow, that's when the everything was done to stop African Americans from voting. There was everything from tests like how many jelly beans are in this jar, literacy tests that were administered to black voters, not to white voters, and violence, lynching. I mean, everything that was done that finally started to reverse the 1965 civil rights law. But that was all about stopping people from voting. And now those efforts to use the legislative power in a state to restrict access to voting and supposedly would apply to everybody. Well, of course it doesn't because there's different impacts. That's what the whole Civil Rights Act acknowledged. You can set something up. The quote is neutral, but really isn't. Anyway, you have any thoughts on that? No, I think I mean, I think that's absolutely right. And in many ways, it's why people think that we're actually taking a step backward rather than continuing to move forward with all this incredible voter suppression with laws that on their face can seem neutral. But at the same time, these conservative Republicans know exactly who's being impacted most, who's being affected, who's being denied their rights. And we got to fight back against it. I've got a couple questions here asking if there's any movement to make election day a federal holiday, or is that something that you can do? Yeah, yeah, I believe that's included in there. I think it's a nature. When I know it's in the mansion proposed to make a holiday, you know, I'm going to speak for myself. I actually think the vote by mail is even more important than it being a holiday. Because I mean, look what we saw in Vermont, where there was immense vote by mail. People really took advantage of it. They had time to decide when and how to vote. They could do it at their convenience and it worked. And, you know, the holiday, I think I'd be for it. But I actually think the mail option is really important. Or having the drop box or being able to have your vote picked up. These things that make it convenient are really important. And you can say, as you mentioned that, because in Texas, they were trying to limit the number of drop boxes that a county could have. And if you were trying to leave your mail ballot in a drop box, you'd have to get it certified by the election clerk first. Yeah, explain a drop box. We don't have those so much in Vermont. And so it's a place for you to leave your ballot somewhere knowing that you've placed it in a secure place where it's going to be received and taken by the election administrator. And one of the efforts was to limit that number in some counties just to one place for the whole county. Well, you can imagine how cumbersome that is for many folks. And so we've been fighting this now for some time. Got a couple more questions here just about getting involved. And, you know, one of them is from Anita who's expressing a lot of frustration because it sounds like she has been volunteering and working really hard on this issue. And Patricia also is feeling such a sense of urgency related to this legislation. How do we light a fire under other folks? And also we have Vermont's own Lieutenant Governor Mollie Gray has written in welcoming Congressman Castro virtually to Vermont and saying how can we as Vermonters including attorneys and advocates get involved in the fight to protect voting rights and prevent voter suppression? So people need to get fired up, folks. Well, first, if you have any relatives in Texas or in other states where this is where you see voting rights under assault, please reach out to them and ask them to speak up to be part of that chorus of voices that's speaking to state leaders and legislators and asking them to stop this voter suppression. And then just mobilizing, as Peter mentioned earlier, helping the groups that are organizing and taking on this fight and reaching out to the policymakers, the decision makers in Congress who are, look again, as Democrats, we have the numbers, the people that we need to make sure that we create an exception to the filibuster. We pass HR one, we pass HR four. We have the power to do that in this term and stop a lot of these bad bills from taking effect. Yeah, Anita, I know you and I correspond a lot in sometimes talking on the phone but you speak for a lot of people where if you're in Vermont and you are lobbying Patrick Bernier, maybe it's kind of frustrating because we already, we agree with you. And we've got to change minds of some folks like Ted Cruz. But feel free to try, yeah. But I do want to say this because when we're facing something where we know it's really wrong and we're looking for some way to affect it and, you know, in Vermont, we've got people who support what we all share, that access to voting. We can't let ourselves get discouraged because that works for the folks fighting against us. And it's hard sometimes not to get down and get discouraged about it. It's really hard and I always think that, you know, if you have relatives in Texas do that, if you can contribute, do that. But it's really important just in our own communities wherever you live to engage with other promoters and whether they agree with you or they don't and talk about it and get the conversation going and find some things you can do by getting involved locally to create a sense of community. You know, one of the things that really sustains me why I can't be interested in your thoughts about it. In Vermont, people a lot of times ask me how do you do it down there because they see the spectacle of what we're dealing with here. Oh, sure. But when I go home and I see Vermonters working together on concrete things and where they like we get some money to make better, safer intersection. Well, that means when parents are driving their kids to school, kids are safer. Yeah. And whether they those parents voted for Trump or voted for Biden, the kids are safer. That's a good thing. And, you know, in Vermont, in your community, you have a way you have a capacity to do concrete things that are beneficial, even if there's some of interactive what we're talking about now. And I think that's really worthwhile. Yeah. And I think that should be the focus of government is doing impactful, meaningful things for people in their lives, whether it's an infrastructure in the streets and roads, or in health care, or their children's schools, colleges, universities, all those things, but rather than spending so much time figuring out how to keep people from voting. Yeah. You know, the big problem in our country is not that people vote too often, it's that not enough people actually go vote. Yeah. Or we're spending a lot of time, you know, drawing these weird shapes on maps in gerrymandering. But you're right. And that's one reason that I'm excited about this transport infrastructure bill that we've been working on, because I think that's going to be so beneficial to so many different communities across the country. I've got one last question here that feels like a good one to end on. And then you guys can sum up. This is again from Adrienne, we have how do you feel like, and this seems like what you guys were just talking about, how do we feel like we should talk about this issue so we don't demotivate people and make them feel like their vote actually won't count. Or they get so frustrated they stay home in 2022. Thanks so much for this conversation. Well, you know, again, when you feel powerless, it's very debilitating. And I can't do much to affect Ted Cruz. And even Joaquin Castro, there's one. Well, that's got to say, you're one of the most effective members of Congress. You've had an extraordinary career. And I'm sure even you can affect Ted Cruz. You know what I mean? So it's frustrating, because you've got to make some judgments about where you can put your time. But on the other hand, getting involved locally where you are and doing what you can. And it's everything from if you do ever relative in Texas, do that, if you can make a modest contribution to folks who are, say, in Georgia, like Stacey Abrams, or the work you're doing, the folks in Texas are doing, that's a good thing to do. But I always come back to somehow, some way, you've got to have confidence by being a good person in your neighborhood, by contributing where you are, somehow that's going to have a ripple impact and create good things down the line, even if you can't see it somehow, some way, even if you're discouraged. And by the way, it's scary for Joaquin, because I mentioned we were here in, you know, in many ways, it was heartbreaking for me to see some of my Republican colleagues who I've respected a lot, both to decertify, because that's not having an argument with them about what's the right tax policy, the health care policy, prescription drugs. I mean, that's a norm where I thought that all of a sudden with the outcome of the election, we all validated that that was not our call. So it was, it was, it was a sad feeling for me and still is. But we've each got to get up each day and do everything that we can and do it locally, do it with the people in your school board, do it to encourage younger person to get involved. So I don't know about you, I mean, that's, I mean, you know, you grew up on the west side of San Antonio, I mean, no silver spoon in, you know, I mean, it's amazing with you, your family's, your brother ran for president and served in the cabinet. I mean, you know, you're an example of what can be done when, how in the world did you do that? You know, and I grew up with a family that was very involved in grassroots politics, very much felt like outsiders to the system in a community that oftentimes felt powerless. And I would ask people to believe, most of all, to believe that your voice and that your commitment can actually make a difference. And, and it absolutely can. Like I said, on this particular thing, as Democrats, we're in a position to fight off a lot of these pernicious voting rights suppression tactics. And so please don't give up and stay in there and fight. And your voice will make a difference in the end, I believe. Yeah. But you know, call your senators, volunteer, tell your friends about this, ask them to get involved, just keep the conversation going. Great. Well, thank you both so much. I think we're about out of time. And so like Congressman Welch said, you've got your action items. And I put this in all the groups that they mentioned in the chat. So you can definitely head there. And we'll send an email out to everyone with those links and with some steps that you can take. And Secretary of State Khandos from Vermont, saying that Representative Castro, when he comes to Vermont, stop by my office, bring Congressman Welch for a cup of coffee. And he's done great work. So thanks, Secretary Khandos. We're going to do better. We'll give you Ben and Jerry's a good craft beer. And Peter's been after me. But I've never, I confess, and y'all will have to forgive me, that I have never been to Vermont. And I need to go, because I've been to Massachusetts, obviously, I went to school there. I've been to Maine, I've been in New Hampshire, I'm all around, but I need to go to Vermont. And I promise I will get there. Look forward to it. And Secretary Khandos, I just want to end by saying thank you for the tremendous work you did. And he was the head of the National Secretary of State Organization, was just the stalwart. Thank you for all your work for access to voting. So thank you all, everybody.