|
Speedy elections if attacked Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040423/D824CLTO0.htmlhttp://apnews.myway.com/article/20040423/D824CLTO0.html
House OKs Speedy Elections if Attacked
Apr 23, 3:51 AM (ET)
By JIM ABRAMS
WASHINGTON (AP) - Recognizing its own vulnerability in the age of terrorism, the House has agreed to speed up special elections to replenish its numbers when 100 or more lawmakers die in an attack.
"This bill will guarantee the failure of any terrorist attempt to decapitate the legislative branch of the United States," Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, said after the 306-97 vote Thursday.
Under the legislation, the House speaker could declare "exceptional circumstances" when 100 or more seats in the 435-seat body are left vacant by a catastrophic event, triggering special elections in affected districts that must be held within 45 days. The House approved an amendment protecting the voting rights of military personnel under the expedited system.
While the final vote was decisive, many Democrats warned that speeding up elections was not enough and, at a time of terrible crisis, could expose Congress to weeks of lacking the manpower or the authority to act. Many sought a constitutional amendment that would allow temporary appointments of lawmakers before elections could be held.
"No representation at all for a period of 45 days is a more grave and egregious insult to the intent of the framers (of the Constitution) than would be temporary appointments," said Rep. Brian Baird, D-Wash., a chief proponent of the broader constitutional approach.
The Constitution requires that the House fill vacancies by elections.
The legislation has yet to be taken up in the Senate, where, under the 17th Amendment of 1913, vacancies can be temporarily filled by appointments made by governors. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has introduced a constitutional amendment giving states the flexibility to decide how to quickly fill seats in a national emergency.
Congressional continuity has been discussed since the 1950s, when the threat of nuclear annihilation loomed. It became a more pressing issue after Sept. 11, 2001, with the widely held belief that United Flight 93 was headed for the U.S. Capitol until it crashed in a Pennsylvania field.
"Had it not been for the heroic actions of the passengers" of that flight, said Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., chief sponsor of the legislation, "Congress' ability to function may have been severely disrupted."
Sensenbrenner and other GOP leaders strongly opposed the idea of 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."
Backers of the constitutional approach said the 45-day election time frame was both too short for some states to prepare, disenfranchising some voters, and too long to leave Congress in a debilitated state. Some warned of the executive branch, possibly headed by a Cabinet secretary if the president is killed, assuming dictatorial powers.
"If we do not do this we will cede total power and authority to the executive branch," said Rep. Martin Frost, D-Texas.
In a concession to Democrats and some in his own party who support a constitutional amendment, Sensenbrenner promised that the Judiciary Committee would vote on an amendment soon.
Hearings also were scheduled on the issue of incapacitation, or how to define when a member who is still alive is unable to carry out his congressional duties, possibly because of a biological or chemical attack.
The constitutional approach is backed by the nonpartisan Continuity of Government Commission, formed in the fall of 2002 to study how to keep Congress functioning after a disaster.
The commission's chairmen - former Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo., and Lloyd Cutler, White House counsel to presidents Carter and Clinton - said in a recent letter that not one of their members went into the task with the desire to amend the Constitution.
"Nevertheless, the evidence we considered led us to conclude that, for the sake of the Constitution itself, the security of our nation and the preservation of the Congress, a constitutional amendment is necessary to provide continuity in the face of a catastrophic attack."
---
The bill is H.R. 2844.
---
On the Net:
Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov/
Continuity of Government Commission: http://www.continuityofgovernment.org/
|
|
