[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 17032-17033]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           S. 2844, CONTINUITY IN REPRESENTATION ACT OF 2004

  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, this evening the Senate is expected to 
consider H.R. 2844, the Continuity in Representation Act of 2004. While 
there are significant problems with this bill, I believe it is in the 
best interest of ensuring the continuity of government that the Senate 
pass the bill, as received from the House, without amendment, before we 
begin this extended recess.
  The most troubling problem with this bill is that it may have the 
unintended consequence of disenfranchising overseas military voters who 
are serving this Nation in combat. So in taking this action tonight, 
let me suggest that our work will not be done. I strongly encourage my 
colleagues in the House to review this legislation in light of these 
concerns and to consider adopting technical corrections to this bill to 
address its unintentional consequences.
  The bill before the Senate today is, at best, a stopgap measure which 
attempts to provide a way to reconstitute the House of Representatives 
in

[[Page 17033]]

the event that in excess of 100 vacancies occur in its membership. 
Unlike vacancies in the Senate, which under the Seventeenth Amendment 
can be immediately filled, the House has no way to reconstitute itself 
short of holding elections. In essence, H.R. 2488 requires the States 
to hold expedited special elections to fill vacancies which occur under 
extraordinary circumstances.
  The House-passed bill provides that upon the announcement by the 
Speaker of the House that more than 100 vacancies exist in the 
membership of the House, the States affected must hold a special 
election within 45 days of the announcement, unless there is a 
regularly scheduled general election scheduled within 75 days of the 
announcement. This overly optimistic time line all but ensures that 
overseas military voters and overseas voters will not have their 
ballots counted in such an election.
  In an attempt to address the issue of overseas military voters and 
other overseas voters, the House adopted language which calls on the 
States, but does not require them, to issue absentee ballots or voting 
material to overseas military voters within 15 days of the Speaker's 
announcement. However, the bill then requires such States to accept and 
process such ballots for up to 45 days from the date that the State 
transmitted the ballot to the voter. On its face, those deadlines would 
require that an election be held no sooner than 60 days after an 
announcement by a Speaker of the House in order to ensure that such 
absentee military ballots are counted.
  However, the situation may be much worse. Because the House bill does 
not require States to transmit ballots to overseas military voters by 
any specific date, under certain State laws, such voters can receive 
absentee ballots up to literally the day before the election. In such a 
case, a State would be required to accept the overseas military ballot 
up to 45 days after that date, or 90 days after the Speaker's 
announcement.
  The obvious result of these two provisions is to potentially extend 
the date of the election beyond the required 45 days after the 
Speaker's announcement--ranging from 46 days to 90 days. And therein 
lies the problem: are overseas military ballots that are received by 
the State from 1 to 90 days after the actual election date still 
counted, or are they ignored unless the election is close?
  The unintended consequence of this bill is to tell our brave men and 
women in uniform, who are literally putting their lives on the line for 
this Nation in combat overseas, that while they may be able to cast a 
vote, there is no guarantee that their vote will be counted. That is 
simply an unacceptable result.
  On the other hand, if the result is to hold an election open until 
all possible overseas ballots are received, then this bill does not 
provide for expedited elections at all. In fact, the result may be the 
inability of our Government to function for as long as 90 days after a 
catastrophe. That would be contrary to the stated purpose of the bill.
  And that is why our work is not done. This bill may be a necessary 
interim measure, but to ensure that there is no lapse in the authority 
of the House, and the ability of Congress, to exercise its 
constitutional responsibilities, may require a constitutional amendment 
providing for an appointment to fill a vacancy. In the meantime, until 
an amendment to the Constitution can be adopted and ratified providing 
for the immediate reconstitution of the House, this measure provides 
some assurance that our representative form of government will 
continue.
  Numerous organizations have called on the House to adopt a 
constitutional approach, not the least of which is the Continuity of 
Government Commission, chaired by our distinguished former colleague, 
Alan Simpson, and the respected Lloyd Cutler. While I respect the 
concerns of my House colleagues that we preserve the House as an 
elected body, the Framers did not intend that such a noble principle 
become the undoing of the people's representative branch of government.
  We must find a rational and workable way to ensure that our 
Government continues to function despite the intent of terrorists and 
others who would render the people's House silent. But we must do it in 
a way that ensures that all voters, and particularly those military 
voters who are serving overseas during a time of war, have an equal 
opportunity to not only cast a vote, but to have that vote counted.

                          ____________________