There were a few issues°hard word with the c.2020 implementation°hard word of "proxy°hard word voting°hard word" for House members°hard word.
💭 Historically°hard word, for the Senate°hard word, there was a courtesy of "giving°hard word live pair°hard word", where a member°hard word opposed°hard word to a bill°hard word would decline°hard word to vote°hard word, to balance an absent°hard word member°hard word in support of the bill°hard word.
🔥 none of the Founding°hard word Fathers ever°hard word owned a telephone, or even used°hard word a telegraph°hard word.
----
There are issues with the unlimited°hard word use of proxy°hard word voting°hard word.
But, a limited form would be more feasible°hard word.
In particular, it should be optimized°hard word for cases other than a closely-divided°hard word House where every vote°hard word counts.
----
The initial°hard word idea was that remote voting°hard word would be permitted°hard word only from the State Capitol°hard word building of each state.
This has a few advantages°hard word:
- a secure°hard word location°hard word
- re-enforces°hard word the existence of a State Capitol°hard word
- helps representatives to be close to their district°hard word
----
Beyond that: there are distinctions°hard word between procedural°hard word votes°hard word, and substantive°hard word votes°hard word on legislation°hard word. 💡 even "substantive°hard word" is too broad a term; amendments°hard word are considered substantive°hard word, yet°hard word are meaningless°hard word unless-and-until°hard word the underlying°hard word bill°hard word passes
The first set of votes°hard word are often "contingent°hard word"; the nature of later votes°hard word are dependent on them. The infamous°hard word filibuster°hard word results from a failure°hard word to pass a procedural°hard word vote°hard word allowing for a substantive°hard word vote°hard word.
Yet°hard word: it is no great injustice°hard word if there are errors in procedure°hard word. Perhaps a minor°hard word injustice°hard word, but not°hard word a great one.
The impact°hard word of substantive°hard word votes°hard word is much larger°hard word; and these are generally not°hard word contingent°hard word on each other. It is possible to construct°hard word convoluted°hard word scenarios°hard word where one is dependent on another.
💡 But, a certain amount of a "multi-track°hard word" parliamentary°hard word process would be necessary to benefit°hard word from this distinction°hard word. And, unfortunately°hard word, a control-bloc°hard word of both parties is committed°hard word to the ability°hard word to kill bills°hard word procedurally°hard word that would otherwise pass.