Posted on 04/26/2004 11:15:30 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
A nationwide network of activists that uses the Internet to defend constitutional government and individual liberty saw its efforts pay off when the House by a 306-97 vote approved legislation for expedited elections to assure its continued functioning in case large numbers of its members are killed in a terrorist attack or other catastrophe, at the same time preserving the electoral system established by the founders.
"We had a great victory today," said Kent Snyder, executive director of the Liberty Committee, shortly after the April 22 passage of the Continuity in Representation Act, H.R. 2844. "It's great that an overwhelming majority of House members made it clear that the U.S. House of Representatives should be an elected body, not an appointed one."
Sponsored by House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., the legislation would require states to call special elections to fill wide-scale vacancies within 45 days after the House speaker announces that "extraordinary circumstances" – defined as the death or incapacitation of 100 or more of the chamber's 435 members – exist. Replacement candidates would be nominated to the ballot by those political parties recognized in the various states within 10 days of the speaker's announcement. Language to ensure that military personnel stationed overseas would have their voting rights protected was added during the floor debate.
"The House of Representatives is a body elected by the people, and should continue, even under the most extreme circumstances, to be elected by the people," said Missouri Rep. Roy Blunt, the House's No. 3 Republican. "This legislation recognizes that in the event of a catastrophic attack on our government, a system needs to be in place to ensure representative government will continue to function on behalf of the people."
Supporters of H.R. 2844 have taken the wide margin of approval as clear indication that most members agree with Blunt and Sensenbrenner and intend to keep the lower chamber an elected body even in the wake of severe casualties. The measure enjoyed broad bipartisan support, and passage would not have been possible if over half the House Democrats hadn't voted with Republicans.
The roll call on H.R. 2844 shows 202 Republicans and 104 Democrats voted yes; seven Republicans, 89 Democrats and one Independent voted no; and 18 Republicans and 12 Democrats didn't vote.
Spirited and testy debate
But it was by no means clear sailing for H.R. 2844, and debate was reportedly "spirited and often testy."
House members were in overall agreement that the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, revealed a compelling need for a doomsday strategy in case of similar attacks or other catastrophic events in the future. But critics of the measure claim that holding elections – even if expedited – would not be possible within a 45-day timeframe, and even if it were, there would be an unacceptable power vacuum. Some Democrats and a few Republicans favor amending the U.S. Constitution to provide a way for seats to be filled more quickly – perhaps through appointment by governors or state legislators.
"Dare we tempt fate and not provide for an interim solution?" asked Rep. John Larson, D-Conn., a frequent speaker during the debate Thursday.
Larson is one of three Democrats – the others are Reps. Brian Baird of Washington State and Zoe Lofgren of California – who have introduced constitutional amendments allowing vacancies to be filled by appointment until special elections can be held.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., has proposed an amendment authorizing each candidate in a general election for the House or Senate to name, in ranked order, three to five possible temporary successors. Unlike the other proposals, his would apply to any membership change, not just those resulting from a major disaster.
Sensenbrenner and other proponents of H.R. 2844, including the GOP leadership, strongly oppose amending the Constitution to permit interim appointments, arguing that it would "destroy the uninterrupted tradition that only members duly and directly elected by their local constituents should serve in the House." They maintain the problem of continuity can and should be dealt with legislatively.
"The debate today goes basically to the issue of whether the reconstituted House should preserve the tradition that the House of Representatives has always consisted of members that were first elected by the people, or whether we should have appointed representatives – appointed by the governor, appointed by the legislature, or appointed by ourselves before we passed away," Sensenbrenner said.
An appointment process would bring the House of Representatives into line with continuity and replacement procedures already in place for the Senate and the Executive Branch.
"If Armageddon should take place and a disaster should happen, we can have an executive branch that is headed by an appointed Cabinet secretary under the Presidential Succession Law," Sensenbrenner explained. "We could have a Senate of 100 members appointed by the governor of the respective states [as provided by the 17th Amendment]. And if we should amend the Constitution to allow the appointment of members of the House of Representatives, then we would have an appointed House.
"Is that what the framers of the Constitution had in mind? An appointed president? An appointed Senate? And an appointed House of Representatives?" he asked, answering, "No way."
Developing support
The Liberty Committee, a grass-roots group founded by Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, is being credited by many on the Hill with developing the support H.R. 2844 needed for passage.
Until the committee became involved, discussion about congressional continuity was dominated by the pro-amendment arguments of the 15-member Continuity of Government Commission, or COG, a private (not a governmental) panel created in the fall of 2002 to study how to keep the federal government functioning following a disaster.
The COG Commission – a joint project of the American Enterprise Institute and Brookings Institution – is co-chaired by former Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo., and Lloyd Cutler, White House counsel to presidents Carter and Clinton, and includes former presidents Carter and Ford and former speakers Newt Gingrich and Tom Foley. Funding is provided by hefty grants from the Carnegie, Hewlett Packard and MacArthur foundations.
As WorldNetDaily reported, the Liberty Committee took up the issue last year after Kent Snyder attended a June 4 press conference held by the COG Commission, at which it unveiled its first report. Titled "Preserving Our Institutions: The Continuity of Congress," the authors promoted a constitutional amendment granting Congress the power to pass a law to allow the appointment of representatives, at least on a temporary basis, until elections could be held.
Speakers at the June press conference confidently predicted there would be no opposition to such an amendment and that following quick congressional approval (no later than Sept. 11, 2003), it would be ratified by the states within 14 to 18 months.
Snyder recalled he and Rep. Paul conferred and decided the issue was serious enough that some kind of opposition within Congress had to be developed. On July 23, the committee sponsored a special briefing session at the Library of Congress for staffers from both the House and the Senate, and over 70 attended. Besides Paul, speakers included Arkansas Democratic Rep. Vic Snyder (no relation to Kent Snyder) and professor Charles Rice of Notre Dame Law School.
"That briefing session is where the line was drawn," says Kent Snyder. "In terms of getting down to the nitty-gritty, that briefing was instrumental. Not only were staffers informed as to the dangers of an amendment – no matter how seemingly benign – a message was sent that there was real opposition."
The following day, Sensenbrenner introduced H.R. 2844 as an alternative to a constitutional amendment, and Paul and others quickly signed on as cosponsors.
Switching the focus
Besides working with members of Congress, the Liberty Committee had great success mobilizing the public into demanding that representatives support the bill. The committee's website features a special program enabling anyone, anywhere in the country to sign and send letters electronically to his or her representative.
Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., applauds the committee and its executive director for their efforts against the pro-amendment advocates and for the success of H.R. 2844.
"Their efforts were crucial, in my opinion, in getting the focus switched to having expedited election procedures so that the U.S. House of Representatives could always be elected by the people and not appointed," Goode told WorldNetDaily. "They did a good job."
Goode admitted that when the COG proposal originally came out he was in favor of it because it seemed to make sense. But after last year's briefing, he realized it was a bad proposal and decided to support H.R. 2844 instead.
Snyder said that although he is pleased with last week's vote, the advocates for a constitutional amendment are by no means defeated and the fight will continue.
"Sensenbrenner has promised to hold a hearing – a second one – on amendments," said Snyder, who predicts the hearing will be held soon.
"The question comes down to this: There are people who want to maintain the House of Representatives as an elected body and there are people who want to turn the House of Representatives into an appointed body. That's it," said Snyder. "Everything else we talked about today – whether it will be 45 days or 10 days, this day, that day, whether the secretary can call the election, whether it's 100 people killed or whether there's a catastrophe worse than Tom Clancy could write about in [the novel] 'Executive Orders' – whatever it is, it comes down to two ways of thinking. You either believe the House should be an elected body, or believe and want it to become an appointed body.
"Obviously for us the House should always be an elected body.
"So the next battle is going forward and we'll have to work even harder to defeat any movement for a constitutional amendment," he said.
This is what happens when the voters actively participate collectively in the system, rather than sitting around and stewing in their own juices on their own, complaining about problems around them with other voters.
"The House of Representatives shall be chosen every second year by the people of the several states ..."
I believe there is already existing case law concerning attempted "out of sequence" congressional elections or appointments.
However, since each house of Congress is responsible for making their own operating rules, they could establish extraordinary quorum rules based on the number of surviving members.
You haven't heard Ben Chandler campaigning, nothing was said...no issues..Prior to 11/03 (Ky. Gov. race), "BUSH This, BUSH That" ..and lost.
JMO, In 13 wks, He had no talking points on many issues, for the most part. The state's liberal papers carried his very short congressional campaign...they lionize his grandfathers' ("Happy" Chandler) record, not his...
Oh, I understand that...it was that Chandler remark...the "NAME RECOGITION" factor, in House special elections...and lazy voters.
"following my tagline" thing. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.