As a various election matters bill is being considered by the House of Representatives, an amendment that would require state and local candidates to sign a pledge for a peaceful transfer of power failed last week.
Rep. Cherrish Pryor, D-Indianapolis, proposed the amendment that would require candidates filing for federal, state and local officers to sign a “pledge of consent supporting” the peaceful transfer of power whether they win or not, according to the amendment.
A candidate would be disqualified from the election “unless the pledge of consent is signed” and filed with the election division, which would create the language of the pledge and make public the names of the candidates that signed the pledge, according to the amendment.
“This is not a Democrat or a Republican issue,” Pryor said in a news release. “An elected official should not be prevented from being prepared on day one just because the losing candidate is holding sour grapes.”
The amendment failed in a 24-67 vote.
Rep. Ragen Hatcher, D-Gary, who voted in favor of the amendment, said she was “disappointed that such a common-sense amendment did not pass” because a peaceful transfer of power ensures a “sharing of information between the incumbent and the elected candidate so that person is ready on day one.”
“Peaceful transfers of power are essential to any democracy,” Hatcher said. “A transfer of power means more than just giving over the keys to the office and pointing to where the coffee machine is. A peaceful transfer means more than a lack of throwing fists.”
Area Republican representatives and leaders say the amendment is redundant because candidates already take an oath to uphold the Constitution and it’s understood that when a candidate loses he or she concedes the race.
Rep. Hal Slager, R-Schererville, said he voted against the amendment because candidates understand that they uphold the Constitution.
“This is another classic case of a law on top of a law,” Slager said.
Rep. Mike Aylesworth, R-Hebron, said that he voted against the amendment because a pledge for the peaceful transfer of power is “unnecessary.”
“I think (the amendment) is reflecting what happened with the president,” Aylesworth said, referring to former President Donald Trump.
The House impeached Trump for incitement of an insurrection following the events of Jan. 6 when a mob of his supporters breeched the U.S. Capitol, which resulted in five deaths and numerous indictments. His impeachment trial starts Tuesday in the Senate.
Lake County Republican Party Chairman Dan Dernulc agreed that the bill was aimed at Trump’s statements about a peaceful transfer of power ahead of the 2020 election.
While people have a difference of opinion if there was a peaceful transfer of power between Trump and President Joe Biden after the election, Dernulc said there was a peaceful transfer of power on Inauguration Day.
“There was a peaceful transfer of power. (Trump) left before the inauguration,” Dernulc said. “Some might say he didn’t leave peacefully, but the transfer was peaceful. No guns were pointed at anyone.”
When asked if signing such a pledge would help with public perception in the peaceful transfer of power to avoid events like the insurrection on Jan. 6, Dernulc said people have different perceptions.
The legislature shouldn’t propose legislation based on the actions of one person, Dernulc said.
“We shouldn’t be legislating because you liked or didn’t like how someone acted,” Dernulc said.
A pledge for a peaceful transfer of power signed by candidate wouldn’t make a difference in the event the incumbent candidate loses an election, Dernulc said.
Dernulc acknowledged that losing an election is not what candidates want, but it’s important to call and concede when it is clear the election is lost.
“You need to congratulate whoever is coming in,” Dernulc said. “Even in my office, I think it’s important.”
