mr. chairman , i thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time . 
my good colleague from california raised the exact and critical point . 
the question is , what happens during those 45 days ? 
we will need to support elections . 
there is not a single member of this house who has not supported some form of general election , a special election , to replace the members at some point . 
but during that 45 days , what happens ? 
the chair of the constitution subcommittee says this is what happens : martial law . 
we do not know who would fill the vacancy of the presidency , but we do know that the succession act most likely suggests it would be an unelected person . 
the sponsors of the bill before us today insist , and i think rightfully so , on the importance of elections . 
but to then say that during a 45-day period we would have none of the checks and balances so fundamental to our constitution , none of the separation of powers , and that the presidency would be filled by an unelected member of the cabinet who not a single member of this country , not a single citizen , voted to fill that position , and that that person would have no checks and balances from congress for a period of 45 days i find extraordinary . 
i find it inconsistent . 
i find it illogical , and , frankly , i find it dangerous . 
the gentleman from wisconsin refused earlier to yield time , but i was going to ask him , if virginia has those elections in a shorter time period , they should be commended for that . 
so now we have a situation in the congress where the virginia delegation has sent their members here , but many other states do not have members here . 
do they at that point elect a speaker of the house in the absence of other members ? 
and then three more states elect their representatives , temporary replacements , or full replacements at that point . 
they come in . 
do they elect a new speaker ? 
and if that happens , who becomes the president under the succession act ? 
this bill does not address that question . 
this bill responds to real threats with fantasies . 
it responds with the fantasy , first of all , that a lot of people will still survive ; but we have no guarantee of that . 
it responds with the fantasy that those who do survive will do the right thing . 
we are here having this debate , we have debates every day , because people differ on what the right thing is to do . 
i have been in very traumatic situations with people in severe car wrecks and mountain climbing accidents . 
my experience has not been that crisis imbues universal sagacity and fairness . 
it has not been that . 
people respond in extraordinary ways , and we must preserve an institution that has the deliberative body and the checks and balances to meet those challenges . 
many of our states are going increasingly to mail-in ballots . 
we in this body were effectively disabled by an anthrax attack not long after september 11 . 
i would ask my dear friends , will you conduct this election in 45 days if there is anthrax in the mail and still preserve the franchise of the american people ? 
how will you do that ? 
you have no answer to that question . 
i find it extraordinary , frankly , that while saying you do not want to amend the constitution , we began this very congress by amending the constitution through the rule , by undermining the principle that a quorum is 50 percent of the body and instead saying it is however many people survive . 
and if that rule applies , who will designate it , who will implement it ? 
the speaker , or the speaker 's designee ? 
again , not an elected person , as you say is so critical and i believe is critical , but a temporary appointee , frankly , who not a single other member of this body knows who they are . 
so we not only have an unelected person , we have an unknown person who will convene this body , and who , by the way , could conceivably convene it for their own election to then become the president of the united states under the succession act . 
you have refused steadfastly to debate this real issue broadly . 
you had a mock debate in the committee on the judiciary in which the distinguished chairman presented my bill without allowing me the courtesy or dignity to defend it myself . 
and on that , you proudly say you defend democracy . 
sir , i think you dissemble in that regard . 
here is the fundamental question for us , my friends , and it is this : the american people are watching television and an announcement comes on and says the congress has been destroyed in a nuclear attack , the president and vice president are killed and the supreme court is dead and thousands of our citizens in this town are . 
what happens next ? 
under your bill , 45 days of chaos . 
apparently , according to the committee on the judiciary subcommittee on the constitution chairman , 45 days of marshal law , rule of this country by an unelected president with no checks and balances . 
or an alternative , an alternative which says quite simply that the people have entrusted the representatives they send here to make profound decisions , war , taxation , a host of other things , and those representatives would have the power under the bill of the gentleman from california ( mr. rohrabacher ) xz4003430 bill or mine to designate temporary successors , temporary , only until we can have a real election . 
the american people , in one scenario , are told we do not know who is going to run the country , we have no representatives ; where in another you will have temporary representatives carrying your interests to this great body while we deliberate and have real elections . 
that is the choice . 
you are making the wrong choice today if you think you have solved this problem . 
