Constitutional Amendment Regarding Appointment of Individuals to Fill Vacancies in House of Representatives
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF INDIVIDUALS TO FILL VACANCIES IN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES -- (House of Representatives - June 02, 2004)
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, we are asked today to consider the most serious question likely to come before the Congress: how to maintain our government as a democratic representative government in the event of a catastrophic terrorist attack. We must think carefully about the unthinkable, and we must do it now while we have the opportunity to do so.
Unfortunately, this proposed amendment is being brought up by the Republican leadership under a closed rule, with 90 minutes of debate, no hearing in the Committee on the Judiciary or in any committee of this Congress. An alternative proposed by a Republican colleague from California cannot even be debated under this rule. As the ranking Democratic member of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, the subcommittee with the responsibility to consider all proposed constitutional amendments, I can tell my colleagues that this proposed amendment has never been the subject of a hearing in this Congress.
Let me read what the Republican report on this bill says: "No hearings were held on H.J. Res. 83," period. We have found the time for five hearings on same-sex marriage, and we have found the time to consider a bill to declare the oak tree the official tree of the United States. We have found time for hearings on flag burning but not on how to prevent the destruction of our democratic institutions.
We have found the time to consider a balanced budget constitutional amendment, but no time to consider how to maintain the voice of the American people in the consideration of taxing and spending measures.
These are the twisted priorities of this Republican leadership. How do we protect our democracy in the event of a terrorist attack? Who knows. I would like to know how we can protect our democracy right now. Clearly an issue that is of the highest importance to the Nation, an issue that should be nonpartisan is being handled in a partisan manner. That is anti-democratic.
Is this amendment the right solution to a significant problem? Perhaps. Frankly, I think it goes in the right direction. I have some amendments to it that I would make, if they were in order, if we had time to consider it. We ought to hold hearings.
This House passed a bill to guarantee elections in 45 days. Frankly, I think that 45 days is too quickly. What do you do as a practical matter, especially after a catastrophe, what do you do within those 45 days? I think that the best amendment would probably be something that would be along the lines of this amendment that we are considering now, but I think there ought to be a mandate that there be a special election within a reasonable time period, not 45 days, but maybe 120, 180 days.
What is practical? I think there are other things. But the fact is how do you determine when someone is incapacitated and when he is no longer incapacitated? We ought to have serious hearings. We ought to consider this properly. We ought to consider the gentleman from California's (Mr. Rohrabacher) suggestions, my suggestions, other people's suggestions. We ought to consider the suggestions of law professors. We ought to do this right. This is a serious matter.
Instead, what we have done is take up the chairman's bill. Why? Because he is the chairman. We do not consider anything else. We know that many people think that that is not an adequate bill, but they did not have proper hearings either. Now because of criticism, we are taking up this bill with no amendments and no other considerations.
Frankly, the trouble that Members are having answering these questions is because the Republican leadership will not allow the proper minimal consideration of this issue. That is no way to protect our democracy in these dangerous times.
I would urge that this bill should be sent back to the Committee on the Judiciary. I will vote for it because it is the best thing we have in front of us. We ought not to be in the position we are in.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT