Spurred by a series of incidents including the assassination attempts on former President Donald J. Trump, the shooting of Steve Scalise and three others on a baseball field in 2017, Congress is refocusing on the threat of political violence, with some lawmakers stating that the legislative body is unprepared for such a scenario. During a Thursday hearing held by the House Administration Modernization Subcommittee, Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio) warned, “Congress hasn’t fully considered the implications of a mass casualty event affecting members and the impact it would have on our ability to function in a time of need. So, I think we need to take some next steps.” Wenstrup is among four lawmakers pushing for a constitutional amendment that would allow for the rapid replacement of House members if a mass casualty event occurred. Currently, the Constitution allows the Senate to fill vacancies with a temporary appointment until a special election can be held. However, House vacancies must be filled by special election, a process that can take months. In a scenario where more than 100 House seats become vacant — a situation the lawmakers are planning for — such a delay could cripple the federal government. Wenstrup, along with Reps. William Timmons (R-S.C.), Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.), and Derek Kilmer (D-Wash.), is proposing a constitutional amendment that would expedite the replacement process for House members unable to serve due to a mass casualty event. Under the proposed amendment, every House member, upon taking office, would submit a list of at least five individuals who meet the qualifications to serve in Congress. In the event of the member's death, the governor of the state would have 10 days to appoint one of these individuals as a temporary replacement. The appointee would serve until a special election could be held. Following the Sept. 11 attacks, legislation was passed requiring states to hold special elections within 49 days if a mass casualty event resulted in more than 100 House vacancies. However, a report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that many state election officials were unaware of this law, with only nine states having implemented laws that align with the federal 49-day requirement. Even in states that have adopted the law, officials reported challenges in administering special elections on such a short timeline. These challenges included recruiting candidates, managing public perceptions of an expedited election, preparing ballots, and testing voting machines. Although the proposed constitutional amendment has garnered some support, it faces significant hurdles. Constitutional amendments require a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate, followed by ratification from three-quarters of state legislatures. Rep. Stephanie Bice (R-Okla.), chairwoman of the subcommittee, noted in her opening remarks that 40 constitutional amendments have been introduced since 1945, “and none of them have passed.”A bipartisan group of congressional lawmakers is proposing a constitutional amendment to address the possibility of a mass casualty event that could render the House of Representatives nonfunctional.
Some argue that failure to prepare for an incident that could remove a large number of lawmakers is an invitation to political violence.
“A violent domestic terrorist attempted to assassinate Republican members of Congress. … He decided to use assassination as a tool for political change. He wanted to wipe out the Republican majority and change the balance of power in our Congress,” Wenstrup said. “Let’s take that opportunity away.”
