Ron Paul - Congress Cannot Be Appointed

House Web Site ^ | 1-26-2004 | Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX)

[jmc813]

In the months following the September 11th terrorist attacks, questions arose about whether Congress could continue to function if many of its members were killed or injured in a future terrorist attack. These concerns resulted in the creation of a commission that advocated a first in American history, namely the appointment of individuals to the U.S. House. A constitutional amendment has been proposed that would provide the method for such appointments following a catastrophe that killed or disabled a majority of the people in Congress.

I strongly oppose this constitutional amendment, because I believe an appointed Congress would become an unaccountable, tyrannical Congress. Over the past year I met with top scholars, attorneys, and colleagues who reject the idea of an appointed House of Representatives. Fortunately, we had success in turning many members of Congress against the proposal through a series of public lectures, meetings, and published articles. Legislation I cosponsored, recently passed by the House Judiciary committee, will enable congressional districts around the nation to hold emergency elections without resorting to political appointments. The bill has the support of congressional leadership, and should reach the House floor in coming months.

At its heart, the proposed constitutional amendment is fundamentally at odds with the right of the people always to elect their members of the House of Representatives. The term “appointed representative” clearly is an oxymoron. The House, designed as the most directly representative branch of government, must be elected to have any legitimacy. Even “temporary” appointees would be unacceptable, because the laws passed would be permanent.

Those advocating an appointed Congress argue that a U.S. House consisting of only a handful of surviving members would not be seen as legitimate by the public. In fact the opposite is true: the legitimacy of appointed “representatives” would be strongly questioned, especially by those who disagreed with their actions. Appointees would be viewed suspiciously as recipients of political patronage, regardless of the system put in place to appoint them. Appointees would not be seen as legitimate because they would in fact not be legitimate. Without exception, every member of the House of Representatives has been elected for over two hundred years. We can amend the Constitution, but we cannot force the public to accept the loss of its voting franchise.

One very important point should be emphasized: the Constitution already provides the framework for Congress to function after a catastrophic event. Article I section 2 instructs state governors to hold special elections to fill congressional vacancies, while Article I section 4 authorizes Congress to designate the “time, place, and manner” of such special elections if states should fail to act quickly following a national emergency. The legislation passed by the Judiciary committee simply exercises the existing congressional power by requiring states to hold special elections within 21 days after the House Speaker or acting Speaker declares that a majority of House members are incapacitated.

To quote Charles Rice, a distinguished Professor Emeritus at Notre Dame Law School, “When it is not necessary to amend the Constitution, it is necessary not to amend the Constitution.” We must not allow the fear of terrorism to compel us to abandon our existing institutions-- including an elected House. The Constitution is our best ally in times of relative crisis, and it is precisely during such times we should adhere to it rather than rush to amend it.

[o_zarkman44]

Of course I was around. "PPPPPP" Perfect Planning Prevents Piss Poor Protection. Notice all contingency focuses on protecting government power/control first, and the people 2nd. We are still on our own. Nothing has changed.

[LandofLincoln]

Seeing as Congress was meant to meet "A COUPLE OF DAYS A YEAR", in the event that this body of government was wiped out "WE the People" woul;d have plenty of time to elect a new one. The few days without Congress would be money saved.

[kenth]

You have got to be kidding!

I don't think you're seeing the whole picture. What if there is money that needs to be spent? Or, my gosh, taxes! What if we need our taxes raised?! Who's gonna do it? Didn't think of that didya?!

Temporary or not, the legislative to executive line would be erased and the individual's representation lost. It's a bad, bad idea that sets awful precedence for future encroachments on the Constitution. It would be nothing more than a political tool. The states can handle emergency elections, the President or appropriate chain of command can handle emergency military action if needed.

[Johnny_Cipher]

I thought we hashed all of this out during Y2K. I was under the impression that each state government would become the defacto federal government for its own state and that FEMA had an op plan for the federal level for just such a disaster. I could be wrong though.

[weegee]

Without exception, every member of the House of Representatives has been elected for over two hundred years.

From the US Constitution:

Amendment XVII

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any state in the Senate, the executive authority of such state shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, that the legislature of any state may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

CHAPTER 661

VACANCIES AMONG PUBLIC OFFICERS
ELECTED AT STATE ELECTIONS

661:5 United States Senator. If a vacancy occurs in the office of United States senator, the governor shall fill the vacancy by temporary appointment until the next state general election, when a senator shall be elected for the unexpired term.

661:6 United States Representative. If a vacancy occurs in the office of United States representative, the governor with advice of council shall, as soon as practicable, have precepts issued to the selectmen of the towns and cities in the district where the vacancy exists directing them to call a special state general election on the day he designates to fill the vacancy. Such election shall be conducted as provided in RSA 661:11 and shall fill the vacancy for the unexpired term.

Temporary appointments aren't something that would put this nation in jeopardy. Permitting terrorists to be able to choose which states (the coasts) lead/control this country (by striking predominately at those who support the war effort) would be dangerous.

Which is worse being legislated over by a subset of the full Congress (only permitting "elected" members to vote) or being legislated over by a Congress composed of by members from every state (some of whom are temporarily appointed by the Governors of those states)?

[weegee]

If there were an attack on a large group of Congressmen, a Declaration of War would be in order. Such action would require a Congressional vote.

[_Jim]

Notice all contingency focuses on protecting government power/control first, and the people 2nd. We are still on our own. Nothing has changed.

How pessimistic and nearsighted!

Without the continuation of some sort of 'chain of command' (including the civilian portion: congress and the executive branches) none of those disaster relief agencies will do anything!

Does the National Guard call itself out? Of course not ... neither do any of the other alphabet agencies ...

[mabelkitty]

We are not the business to protect the two party cartel.
States can run candidates at large and have them fill the unfinished terms.

[_Jim]

I thought we hashed all of this out during Y2K.

Not to some 'pipple'. Some 'pipple' insist on 'fighting the last war' all over again ...

[_Jim]

Provided, that the legislature of any state may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

I hate to say it, 'cause I'll 'draw fire', but Ron Paul is just grandstanding again ...

[Uncle Miltie]

"Congress Cannot Be Appointed"

Sure it can. Judges make law right now.

[Budge]

Great tongue-in-cheek reply. :)

[Consort]

Article I section 2 instructs state governors to hold special elections to fill congressional vacancies, while Article I section 4 authorizes Congress to designate the “time, place, and manner” of such special elections if states should fail to act quickly following a national emergency.

How are they going to designate the “time, place, and manner” of such special elections if they're all dead? If such a procedure is not yet in place, then now is the time to designate the time frames, places, and manners for each state, district, etc. and the procedures for implementing each phase.

[tallhappy]

A constitutional amendment has been proposed

Proposed? Where? By whom?

Ron Paul is such a lying sack that even when one agrees with his point his nonsensical psycho views (not unlike those of the fringe left) leave little question his overview is purposely distorted and dishonest and is not to be taken seriously.

[DakotaGator]

The executive branch already has survivability, who the hell needs Congress in an emergency????

Exactly! Congress does not run the country. The Executive Branch does. And the survivability mechanisms have been in place for a long time (Can these people spell FEMA?).

At best this is a non-issue raised by people who have no idea how our federal government works. At worst this is another naked power grab!

[PistolPaknMama]

heads up!

[Ravenstar]

An appointed Congress is the final death of the Constitution FOREVER! for any amount of time!

Ravenstar

[Texas Federalist]

Well, what about temporarily returning legislative authority back to the respective state leges while Congress is re-elected? How hard is that? The executive branch already has survivability, who the hell needs Congress in an emergency????

My thoughts exactly. There was actually an editorial about this in Investors Business Daily a year or two ago.

[o_zarkman44]

Refer back to my reference to FEMA. No matter how good the drill is, common sense dictates pessimism when total dependence on government protection is alluded to by the government.