How 46 At-Risk U.S. House Incumbents Voted on Democracy & Insurrection

Issue 1: Decertifying Arizona Electoral Votes


Voting 121 for and 303 against, the House on Jan. 6, 2021, turned back a Republican effort to deny certification of Arizona’s 11 electoral votes won by Joe Biden in the November 2020 election. About 59 percent of Republicans voted in support of decertification and all Democrats who voted were opposed to it. Sponsored by Arizona GOP Rep. Paul Gosar and Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz, the bid for decertification was part of an effort by congressional allies of President Trump to nullify Biden’s victory based on false claims of irregularities that more than 60 state and federal courts had rejected.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con

A yes vote was to decertify Arizona’s electoral votes.

Issue 2: Decertifying Pennsylvania Electoral Votes

Voting 138 for and 282 against, the House on Jan. 7, 2021, defeated a Republican effort to deny certification of Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes won by Joe Biden in the November 2020 election. About 68 percent of Republicans who voted backed the move and all Democrats who voted were opposed to it. Lodged by Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., the objection furthered a strategy by congressional allies of President Trump to nullify Biden’s victory based on false claims of irregularities that more than 60 state and federal courts had rejected.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con

A yes vote was to decertify Pennsylvania’s electoral votes.

Issue 3: Impeaching Donald Trump for Inciting Insurrection

Voting 232 for and 197 against, the House on Jan. 13, 2021, adopted an article of impeachment (H Res 24) charging Donald Trump with “incitement of insurrection” for prompting the January 6 assault on the Capitol by a mob of his supporters attempting to block the transfer of power to President-elect Joe Biden. A Senate trial on the article was conducted days after Biden assumed office on January 20. The article included wording from Section 3 of the post-Civil War 14th Amendment barring from future government office any federal or state official who had “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the United States or given “aid or comfort to the enemies….” All 222 Democrats supported the article, while 197 of the 207 Republicans who voted were opposed to it.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con

A yes vote was to send the article of impeachment to the Senate, which voted for acquittal.

Issue 4: Establishing Outside Commission for Probing January 6

Voting 252 for and 175 against, the House on May 19, 2021, passed a bill (HR 3233) that would establish an independent commission to investigate the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, aimed at preventing a peaceful transition of power to President-elect Joe Biden. Modeled after the civilian commission that investigated the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the panel was to include 10 experts from outside the government appointed in equal numbers by the Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con

A yes vote was to pass the bill, which was later shelved in the Senate by a GOP filibuster.

Issue 5: Establishing Select Committee to Probe January 6

Voting 222 for and 190 against, the House on June 30, 2021, established a select bipartisan committee to investigate the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of former President Trump. The measure (H Res 503) was supported by all members of the Democratic caucus and opposed by all Republicans who voted except Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois. Armed with subpoena power, the panel went on to conduct televised hearings and closed-door sessions during a tenure that ended in January 2023. The committee was formed after Republicans in both chambers rejected a Democratic proposal to establish an independent bipartisan commission modeled after the one that investigated the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.


Floor Debate, Pro & Con

A yes vote was to establish the select committee.

Issue 6: Protecting Voting Rights & Election Integrity

On a party line vote of 220 for and 203 against, the House on Jan. 13, 2022, passed a bill (HR 5746) that would strengthen federal laws against voting discrimination and suppression, unmask the identity of ‘dark money’ donors to political campaigns and prohibit ongoing efforts by at least 19 Republican-controlled state legislatures to restrict the opportunity to vote. The bill combined two measures — the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and the Freedom to Vote Act — into a single bill later shelved by a GOP filibuster in the Senate.

Congress has authority to regulate elections at all levels under the 15th Amendment to the Constitution, which says the right to vote “shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude,” and which empowers Congress “to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”
Congressional authority to regulate congressional elections stems also from Article 1, Section 4 of the Constitution, which states that the “Times, Places and Manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such regulations….”

The bill would:


• Restore a requirement of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that jurisdictions with a history of voter discrimination receive prior federal approval of proposed changes to election rules;

• Set national standards to prohibit states from depriving citizens of the right to vote or injecting partisanship into the way votes are counted and elections administered;

• Establish standards for state voter ID laws and enable all qualified citizens to vote by mail and obtain no-excuse absentee ballots;

• Declare Election Day a national holiday, and require states to allow at least 15 consecutive days of early voting with polls open at least 10 hours per day;

• Expand voter-registration opportunities to include online and same-day registration as well as automatic registration while obtaining a driver’s license;

• Require voting machines to be backed up with paper ballots that can be audited;

• Prohibit the removal of state and local election officials without show of cause;

• Crack down on “dark money” by requiring entities spending at least $10,000 on campaigns to publicly disclose their major donors. Also, campaign ads would have to identify those paying for them;

• Outlaw gerrymandering, the drawing of legislative districts based on partisan factors;

• Impose a surcharge on penalties paid by corporate and high-income tax cheats, using the projected $2 billion in revenue over 10 years to partially finance House general and primary election campaigns. Incumbents and challengers who agreed to limits on individual contributions would receive $6 in public funds for each $1 raised;

• Ensure the right to vote by Native Americans and prohibit spending by foreign nationals on U.S. elections and ballot initiatives;

• Qualify felons who have served their time to vote in federal elections;

• Require presidential and vice-presidential candidates to disclose personal and corporate tax returns;

• Provide funding to modernize local voting equipment and harden systems against cyberattacks;

• And prohibit influence peddling by inaugural committees.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con

A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate, where it was shelved by a Republican filibuster.

Issue 7: Amending Electoral Count Act of 1887

Voting 229 for and 203 against, the House on Sept. 21, 2022, passed a bill (HR 8873) that would amend the Electoral Count Act of 1887 to ensure that a presidential candidate receiving a majority of Electoral College votes becomes president. Named the Presidential Election Reform Act, the measure would protect Congress’s counting of electoral votes against efforts such as those mounted by former President Trump on Jan. 6, 2021, to subvert the certification of Joe Biden as president. Biden received seven million more popular votes than Trump in the 2020 election, a margin of seven percentage points, and received 306 Electoral College votes to Trump’s 232.

The bill would: 


• Clarify that the vice president has only a ceremonial role in receiving electoral results from the states and that he or she lacks authority to count, alter or reject state-submitted electoral votes or to delay the joint session of Congress at which electoral votes are certified.

• Stipulate that the role of Congress is simply to count and certify the electoral votes it receives from the states.

• Raise the threshold in Congress for objecting to certification of a state’s electors. Under the 1887 law, Objections by one House member and one senator could trigger a roll-call vote on whether to certify a state’s electors. Under this bill, support from one-third of each chamber would be required to lodge an objection; one-third majorities in each chamber would be required to bring the objection up for debate; and majority votes in each chamber would be needed to sustain the objection and thus invalidate a state’s electoral votes.

  In addition, the bill would:
• Restrict the number of state or federal officials qualified to object to a state’s counting or certification of its electoral votes. Objections could be lodged only by presidential and vice-presidential candidates listed on the ballot, thus prohibiting the objections by state officials that occurred in some states in 2020.

• Require challenges to be heard on an expedited timetable by a panel of three federal judges, with their ruling reviewable only by the Supreme Court. If a governor refused to certify electoral results upheld in court, another state official such as the secretary of state could perform that duty.

• Set a December 14 deadline for governors or other state officials to certify their election results (the existing deadline iwas six days before the meeting of electors) and require state electors to meet by December 23, or the first business day after that date. to certify electors and send the result to Congress. Under existing law, electors met on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December.

• Stipulate that states can send only one slate of electors to Congress, thus prohibiting the submission of alternate slates that occurred in 2020.

• Allow voting to be extended for up to five days beyond Election Day in extraordinary circumstances such as terrorist attacks or natural disasters, with extensions limited to polling areas directly affected by the catastrophic event.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con

A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate. The bill was later enacted into law.

Issue 8: Republican Barrier to Puerto Rico Statehood

Voting 209 for and 217 against, the House on Dec. 15, 2022, defeated a Republican-sponsored motion that sought to subject the results of any Puerto Rican statehood plebiscite to ratification by two-thirds majority votes in the U.S. House and Senate.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con

A yes vote was to adopt the GOP motion.

Issue 9: Granting Statehood to Puerto Rico

Voting 233 for and 191 against, the House on Dec. 15, 2022, passed a bill (HR 8393) to schedule a plebiscite on Nov. 5, 2023, in which the American territory of Puerto Rico could achieve U.S. statehood. The ballot would present three choices – statehood, independence or sovereignty in “free association” with America. Under free association, current residents but not the future-born could retain certain benefits including U.S. nationality and citizenship, and the two entities could negotiate other potential carryovers from territorial status. Under all three options, Puerto Rico would cease to be an American territory.


Situated about 1,000 miles southeast of Florida, Puerto Rico was annexed by the United States in 1898 during the Spanish-American War. Its residents serve in the U.S. military; cannot vote in presidential elections; lack meaningful voting representation in the U.S. Congress and, in general, do not pay federal income taxes. As a state, Puerto Rico would have two senators and as many as four House members based on its population of 3.6 million. Unless Congress were to increase the number of U.S. congressional districts above the present 435, allotting districts to Puerto Rico would reduce the number of seats in certain other states.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con

A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate, where it died at the close of the 117th Congress.

Issue 10: Canceling District of Columbia Law on Voting Rights

Voting 260 for and 182 against, the House on Feb. 9, 2023, adopted a resolution of disapproval (HJ Res 24) that would nullify a 2022 District of Columbia law qualifying non-citizens including undocumented aliens to vote in local elections if they had lived in D.C. for at least 30 days. Under the 1973 District of Columbia Home Rule Act, the federal territory has limited authority to conduct its own affairs and must receive congressional approval of laws passed by the city council such as this one.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con

A yes vote was to send the measure to the Senate, which also voted to kill the D.C. law.