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 )  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 .  