Seth Moulton on Principles & Values

	Seth Moulton on Principles & Values Democratic Presidential Challenger (withdrawn); MA Rep.

Democrats need to ask what they can do differently

[On opponent Ed Markey]: "Is he too old?" Moulton asked. "Look, every political consultant will tell me not to say this, but the honest truth is, yes, Senator Markey is a very nice guy, but he's been in Congress for 50 years, and he'll be 86 years old at the end of his next term as our junior senator."

"Our party needs to look ourselves in the mirror and say, 'What are we doing wrong, and what can we do differently here?'" he continued.

Source: Boston Globe, "Too Old," on 2026 Massachusetts Senate race , Oct 15, 2025

Religious freedom means no religious registry.

Moulton signed opposing a religious registry

Congressional Summary: Notwithstanding any other provision of the immigration laws, an alien may not be denied admission to the United States because of the alien`s religion or lack of religious beliefs.

Argument Opposed: [Countable.us]: `The U.S. should reserve the right to ban immigrants based on religion. The government may need to enact such a ban in response to a future acts of terror, which could save American lives.`

Argument In Favor: [Cato Institute, Dec. 8, 2016]: Donald Trump proposed prohibiting all Muslim immigration; then specified `suspending immigration from nations tied to Islamic terror.` He said, `People are pouring in from regions of the Middle East,` but that he would `stop that dead, cold flat,` during his first day in office. However, under current law, it is illegal to discriminate against immigrants based on their national origin. For almost a decade, Congress debated creating an immigration system free from discrimination by nationality, country of birth, or country of residence. President-elect Trump, however, now proposes to discriminate unlawfully against certain foreign nationals on the basis of the same protected grounds without any legislation from Congress.

Source: Protect American Families Act 16-HR5207 on May 12, 2016

Question Trump on Emoluments clause.

Moulton signed questioning Trump on Emoluments clause

Excerpts from Letter from 17 Senators to Trump Organization: The Trump Organization`s continuing financial relationship with President Trump raises concerns about whether it is a pass-through for income that violates the Constitution`s two Emoluments Clauses: Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 on foreign Emoluments; and Article II, Clause 7 on domestic Emoluments. Please answer the following questions to help Congress understand:

When the Trump Organization receives income from a government agency, how is that income segregated & reported?
How does the Trump Organization determine if income is derived from foreign governments?
Trump promised to `donate all profits from foreign government payments made to his hotels to the US Treasury.` Has the Trump Organization created a mechanism to make such payments?
What is the estimated value of the 38 Chinese trademarks recently awarded to the Trump Organization? And the reported 157 pending trademark applications in 36 countries?

Legal Analysis: (Cato Institute, `Emoluments Clause vs. Trump Empire,` 11/29/16): The wording of the Emoluments clause points one way to resolution: Congress can give consent, as it did in the early years of the Republic to presents received by Ben Franklin. It can decide what it is willing to live with in the way of Trump conflicts. If it misjudges public opinion, it will pay a political price at the next election.

FOIA argument: (ACLU Center for Democracy, `FOIA Request,` 1/19/17): We filed our first Freedom of Information Act request of the Trump Era, seeking documents relating President Trump`s conflicts of interest relating to his business connections. When Trump took the oath of office, he didn`t take the steps necessary to ensure that he and his family`s business interests comply with the Constitution. Some have even argued that upon taking the oath of office, the new president is already violating the Emoluments Clause.

Source: Letter from 17 Senators 17LTR-EMOL on May 18, 2017

Certify 2020 Presidential election as fully & fairly counted.

Moulton voted NAY blocking certification of the Electoral vote

Explanation of 1/6/21 Electoral Certification, by Emily Brooks, Washington Examiner:Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Paul Gosar led an objection to counting Electoral College votes from the state of Arizona, the first formal objection to state results in a series of moves that will delay the certification of Joe Biden as the winner of the 2020 presidential election over President Trump. Cruz is advocating for an `emergency 10-day audit` of election returns in disputed states. The usually ceremonial joint session of Congress that convenes to count and accept Electoral College votes will be put on hold as the House and Senate separately debate the objection.

Timeline of 1/6/21 by Wikipedia:

1:12 PM: Gosar and Cruz object to certifying the votes. The joint session separates into House and Senate chambers to debate the objection.
1:35 PM: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) warns that refusing to certify the results of the presidential election under false pretenses would push American democracy into a `death spiral`.
2:12 PM: The first rioter enters the Capitol through a broken window, opening a door for others
2:24 PM: President Trump tweets, `Mike Pence didn`t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify.`
4:17 PM: Trump denounces the riots, but maintaining the false claims that the election was stolen
Around 5:40 PM: As the interior of the Capitol is cleared of rioters, leaders of Congress state that they will continue tallying electoral votes
8:06 PM: The Senate reconvenes, with Vice President Pence presiding.
10:15 PM: The Senate votes 93-6 against the objection (Senate rollcall #1).
11:30 PM: The House votes 303-121 to reject the objection (House rollcall #10).

Source: Congressional vote 21-Cert on Jan 6, 2021

Create Commission to investigate Jan. 6 Capitol riots.

Bill summary:The select committee must (1) conduct an investigation of the relevant facts and circumstances relating to the attack on the Capitol; (2) identify, review, and evaluate the causes of and the lessons learned from this attack; and (3) submit a report containing findings, conclusions, and recommendations to prevent future acts of violence, domestic terrorism, and domestic violent extremism, and to improve the security of the U.S. Capitol Complex and other American democratic institutions.

CBS News summary, by Grace Segers on June 30, 2021:H.R. 3233 would have created a bipartisan, independent commission to investigate the root causes of the breach of the U.S. Capitol, modeled after the 9/11 Commission.

On May 28, the House passed the bill by a vote of 222 to 190, including 35 Republican votes. It then failed in the Senate, where it received an insufficient number of Republican votes to advance.

In response, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on June 24 that the House would establish a select committee [appointed by House Democrats, instead of a bipartisan independent commission] to investigate the Jan. 6 insurrection and general security issues related to the incident. Pelosi said its leadership and members would be announced later. The House passed the resolution to form the committee on June 29, 2021, by a vote of 222-190.

OnTheIssues note: The Senate voting record refers to the earlier rejected bill H.R. 3233, and the House voting record refers to the later bill H.Res.503. The later bill had no Senate vote (but the two House votes were almost identical).

Source: Congressional vote 21-HR503 on May 28, 2021