4

Historically, during events like presidential impeachment proceedings, certain House members have expressed safety concern due to the public exposure of their votes, leading to a desire for secret voting.

I am interested in understanding the legitimacy and procedural aspects of conducting secret votes in the US House of Representatives, particularly when concerns for members' safety are a factor.

Specifically:

  1. Under what circumstances, if any, does the House of Representatives have the authority or mechanisms to conduct votes in secrecy?
  2. What procedures or rules would need to be invoked or followed to ensure a vote is conducted in secrecy?
  3. Can members express concerns about their safety as a valid reason for requesting a secret vote, and how is such a request typically evaluated or approved?
  4. Are there historical precedents or instances where secret votes have been conducted in the House of Representatives due to concerns about members' safety, and if so, what were the outcomes?

I would appreciate factual information, references to relevant rules or precedents, and insights into the legal and procedural aspects of this issue. Understanding the mechanisms in place for addressing safety concerns in the voting process is of particular interest.


enter image description here

Sure, not a problem, per the pop-up suggestion to edit and explain why, I wanted to clarify specifically why Why are congressional votes not secret? does not answer my questions.

  1. It doesn't delve into specific circumstances or mechanisms for conducting secret votes in detail.
  2. It does not provide specific procedures or rules for conducting secret votes.
  3. It does not address whether safety concerns can be a valid reason for requesting a secret vote or how such requests are typically evaluated or approved.
  4. It does not provide historical examples of secret votes due to safety concerns or their outcomes.

Note: It provides some constitutional and historical context regarding the possibility of secrecy in congressional proceedings, it does not directly answer the specific questions about the legitimacy, procedures, and historical precedents related to secret votes in the U.S. House of Representatives, especially when concerns about members' safety are a factor. I'm seeking additional information or sources to address these specific aspects of this inquiry.

  • 3
  • 1
    @RickSmith: in fact the 2nd answer there rather answers the Q. Somewhat theoretically since no [truly] secret votes have been undertaken (unlike in the EP). But it does discuss/say that/when entering them on the record is required. – the gods from engineering Sep 30 '23 at 22:41
  • To @JoeW and others who inquired whether the other/suggested post or any of the answers there adequately address my questions, I've taken the system's recommended approach and made specific edits to my question. I have provided a more detailed breakdown of my inquiries, explicitly stating why the other post or its answers fall short in providing complete answers. – The 'Bernie Sanders' Party Oct 01 '23 at 11:27
  • I still feel that it is a duplicate as it addresses why the votes are not secret with the constitution and transparency being the key factor. Being able to have secret votes removes all accountability. – Joe W Oct 01 '23 at 14:07
  • As a side note, they have the ability to do voice votes in congress which lets people hide how they voted. This does cause situations where congress takes action and everyone ends up denying that they supported that action. – Joe W Oct 01 '23 at 14:40
  • Thank you for your input. While I appreciate the importance of transparency and accountability, my question is specifically focused on understanding the mechanisms and historical precedents of secret votes in the U.S. House of Representatives when safety concerns arise. I'm seeking information on how such votes are conducted and whether they have occurred in the past. I'm looking for more detailed information on the possibility of secret votes under specific circumstances. If you have any insights on these aspects or the use of voice votes, I'd be interested in hearing more. – The 'Bernie Sanders' Party Oct 01 '23 at 17:41

1 Answers1

2

Q: Under what circumstances, if any, does the House of Representatives have the authority or mechanisms to conduct votes in secrecy?

None. It is easy to forget that the Constitution is an order by the people. ("We the People of the United States, ..., do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.") As part of that order "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings". For the House to provide a rule for voting in secret is to say, in effect, that the people ordered the House to hide from the people the votes of their representatives.


Q: What procedures or rules would need to be invoked or followed to ensure a vote is conducted in secrecy?

There are no existing rules for conducting a vote in secret.

Immediately before the vote, the Speaker would need to invoke paragraph 10 of rule XVII in a manner contrary to the stated intent of the rule. This would be a serious abridgment of the First Amendment "freedom of the press", but the House makes its own rules, and changing a rule is not technically "mak[ing] a law".

Secret sessions

  1. When confidential communications are received from the President, or when the Speaker or a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner informs the House that such individual has communications that such individual believes ought to be kept secret for the present, the House shall be cleared of all persons except the Members, Delegates, Resident Commissioner, and officers of the House for the reading of such communications, and debates and proceedings thereon, unless otherwise ordered by the House.

With visitors and the press removed, the vote could then be taken by "division" with the understanding that members will not use the "one-fifth of the quorum rule" for a recorded vote. Only the count of yeas and nays would appear in the record.

The absence of cameras and the press would prevent any identification of how any member voted. The press would rightfully challenge the action, but what was done is done.


Q: Can members express concerns about their safety as a valid reason for requesting a secret vote, and how is such a request typically evaluated or approved?*

Members can express any of their concerns to party leaders. Any such concerns are off the record. There is no privileged motion for conducting a vote in secret for any reason. Only House leadership could address that issue for all or none.

Generally, any concerns about the safety or security of members of Congress are addressed by the U.S. Capitol Police. This is unrelated to voting.

Since 1828, the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) has provided protection for Congress. Over time, the force has grown in numbers, duties, and responsibilities.

USCP officers work to protect life and property; prevent, detect, and investigate criminal acts; and enforce traffic regulations throughout a large complex of congressional buildings, parks, and thoroughfares. Additionally, USCP officers are responsible for protecting members and officers of Congress and their families. USCP serves throughout the U.S. and its territories and possessions.


Q: Are there historical precedents or instances where secret votes have been conducted in the House of Representatives due to concerns about members' safety, and if so, what were the outcomes?

There is no record of a secret vote in the House for any reason.

Rick Smith
  • 35,501
  • 5
  • 100
  • 160
  • Thank you for your thorough response and references. I'll wait a bit longer to see if there are additional insights from other experts. While your answer is quite solid, I want to ensure all perspectives are considered before accepting it. – The 'Bernie Sanders' Party Oct 02 '23 at 09:54
  • The first point is ludicrous. All secret services are indirectly established by the Constitution, and there are no challenges to the basic idea that government officials have the power to hide information to their constituents (SCI, classified info and so on). Why would that secrecy apply to the executive branch and to things like the intelligence or defense (legislative) comittees, but not the full house votes ? How would the preamble to the constitution establish such a precise boundary ? Absurd. – Gouvernathor Oct 03 '23 at 13:08
  • @Gouvernathor - The question was about how to get around the provision of Art. I § 5 cl. 3 requiring that members' votes, yea or nay, be recorded based on the one-fifth rule. The first point was only about hiding votes normally made public. There was no mention of national security or classified information in that point, so I am confused by your comment. – Rick Smith Oct 03 '23 at 14:13
  • I may require a different question that is more specific, but the part of that that stick out to me 'language wise' is the language used in the part of that regarding the 'secrecy' as highlighted in yellow here: https://i.imgur.com/tVTx1i5.png. I got some things swirling in my head, but my top focus now is getting the post re-opened and clarifying for folks what the 'suggested' duplicate is not sufficient or accurate. I know you initially asked me if it was a dupe and then later answered once I clarified, but the post still got closed as a dupe for some reason. I'd like it to be reopened. – The 'Bernie Sanders' Party Oct 03 '23 at 16:01
  • 1
    @The'BernieSanders'Party - You appear to be asking for the recorded vote to be removed after the fact. As I point out in the second question, there is no requirement for a recorded vote -- use division, not the one-fifth rule. But, that does not remove reporting by the press which could identify how each member voted. Removal of some names would show up as discrepancies in the count of the names of representatives voting and the vote total. Removal would have to be all or none. For approval of the journal, a majority could withhold approval until all names are restored. – Rick Smith Oct 03 '23 at 18:03
  • @RickSmith your first point is saying that the preamble of the constitution forbids secret votes. I listed examples of things which are secret yet legal. The preamble is so broad, vague and distant to the matter at hand that I'm asking why it would apply as a blanket ban in one case, and not the others. – Gouvernathor Oct 03 '23 at 23:34
  • @Gouvernathor - It was never about what the preamble could or couldn't allow. The two quotes from the Constitution established the context for the last statement and nothing more. The last statement was sardonic; essentially, it mocked the idea the House could choose to vote in secret without offending the people. – Rick Smith Oct 04 '23 at 00:57
  • @RickSmith well since executive orders can be classified, you could say that "the people" ordered the president to hide from the people the work of their representative, which is exactly what you said ironically. And as much as it may offend some people to some amount (and I don't blame them), the practice doesn't seem likely to stop or to attract popular momentum against it. I still don't see why it would be any different for the legislative branch, and why the house votes would be a particularly relevant boundary. – Gouvernathor Oct 04 '23 at 01:06
  • @The'BernieSanders'Party - If you truly want to reopen this question, you might consider placing it in the Sandbox for proposed questions. Place a few statements about your goals followed by the current question with as many changes as you think necessary. Others can provide advice or recommend additional changes to remove potential problems. Once the changes are complete, the question part can be used to replace the current question. At this point, I am not inclined to reopen the question. – Rick Smith Oct 04 '23 at 02:37
  • I'm puzzled by your decision to answer a question you believe should be closed. I'm not entirely clear on what remains unclear despite the clarifications I've already offered. It appears that there may be an influence on the community's perception of its actions based on advice from individuals with higher reputation or moderators, at least from my observations. It seems a bit biased, as people tend to follow the lead of reputable figures, which may explain why my specific questions within a particular context haven't been enough to deter the closure votes thus far. – The 'Bernie Sanders' Party Oct 04 '23 at 12:17
  • @The'BernieSanders'Party - I never considered it a duplicate. I only noted a related question. Initially, I had no intention to answer the question. After more than 24 hours with no answer and realizing that others didn't quite understand that the question focused on member "safety" rather than voting secrecy, I posted an answer. – Rick Smith Oct 04 '23 at 13:28
  • @RickSmith I forgot to ask you for clarification, at the end of the answer you provided, you state "There is no record of a secret vote in the House for any reason". Can you tell me if this means that whenever any secret vote is conducted, there is never a record kept of that, or that there has never been a secret vote completed? I think I know what you mean but wanted to ask per wording and interpretation and perspective, one could draw either conclusion word-for-word there. – The 'Bernie Sanders' Party Oct 21 '23 at 23:57
  • 1
    @The'BernieSanders'Party - No secret vote was ever conducted in the House as part of the official business of the House. – Rick Smith Oct 22 '23 at 00:04