|
1. Would each chamber of Congress benefit from a comprehensive look at these issues through a Joint Committee, as recommended by the Modernization Select Committee?
Chairwoman Bice (OK-15): Mr. Wickham, do you remember why the House has proposed a temporary Joint Committee to study continuity issues and make recommendations, which was considered and passed in the House in 2003, didn't get any traction in the Senate?
Tom Wickham: I don't recall that specifically with regard to that piece of legislation. It has been challenging in the past to schedule joint exercises, joint continuity exercises in the past because of the different schedules of the bodies, the different, makeups of the bodies and different plans for continuity. So, it is not confined to that one, specific piece of legislation, but joint efforts have been difficult.
Chairwoman Bice (OK-15): Do you think it potentially could be because the Senate does have a continuity plan in place in a different manner and it may not be as important to them to actually address this issue as it is for the House? Could that be one reason?
Tom Wickham: It certainly could be one reason. Both Houses could have in place their own plans that they are confident in its feasibility.
Chairwoman Bice (OK-15): Do you see that idea, which the Select Committee recommended, as a punt or perhaps a potential way to examine these issues comprehensively? We haven't pushed forward with the constitutional amendment on this issue, more of an examination, but do you feel like that we're sort of, abdicating the responsibilities?
Tom Wickham: No, I think it's the latter, that both bodies could benefit from fresh review of these circumstances. As I said, the, the intensity following 9/11 was quite strong and we worked 6 months with great intensity. A similar review with heightened intensity would benefit both Houses.
 |
|
Click the image or here to view Chairwoman Bice's full Q&A.
2. What recommendations do you have for the subcommittee going forward?
Rep. Mike Carey (OH-15): What are your views on the Select Committee's recommendation for the Joint Committee to investigate these issues more fully and make recommendations on what we're doing and what we're speaking about today?
Rep. Brad Wenstrup (OH-02): Beyond recommendations, I'm pleased that you're doing it, as I've said. I mean, this is fantastic, probably long overdue, but, I'm seeing serious conversations about a serious matter coming from both sides of the aisle. I want you to drive on and and keep going with this that I hope can result in, in a change in how our laws read, how our Constitution reads, so that we are better able to serve the American people. We don't want someone to be able to take away the voice of Americans here in this body, you know, we are a democratic republic. We represent the people, they've selected us. If there's something that happens, then someone that we recommend should be able to fill in temporarily until the normal state process can take place.
|
|
|
Click the image or here to view Rep. Carey's full Q&A.
3. How have states implemented existing federal law?
Rep. Laurel Lee (FL-15): As Chair of the Subcommittee on Elections, I am interested in ensuring States are equipped and prepared to smoothly and expeditiously fill House vacancies through special elections in the event of the unthinkable. Ms. Gambler, I would like to return to your testimony. Thank you for the preliminary insights that you have shared with us from the GAO's ongoing review of state capabilities for holding special elections for house vacancies. I'd like to go back to the input that you got from the survey from state elections officials. Nine states have passed laws concerning special elections that mirror the federal 49 day requirement, but it sounds like, some of the states have been more successful there than others. Would you explain, elaborate a little bit more on the types of procedures that the nine states who do mirror federal law have adopted, what aspects of those laws have they been able to successfully implement?
Rebecca Gambler: Absolutely, Congresswoman, thank you for the question. So, there's a little bit of variation across those nine states, but, generally, most of them have adopted into their state laws provisions addressing the 49 day time frame that's specified in 2 U.S.C. 8B. A few of the states have also addressed other aspects of 2 U.S.C. 8B, which is the federal law we're talking about, and those include provisions related to the selection process and the transmission of ballots for military and overseas voters.
|
|
|
Click the image or here to view Rep. Lee's full Q&A.
|
|
|
|
