IP: What if Washington DC was taken out?

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> From: "RV Head" <4whp () home com>
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17786-2001Dec9.html
>
> Worst-Case Scenario: The U.S. Has None Constitutional Crisis, Chaos Foreseen
> if Top Leaders Killed
>
>
>
> By Dana Milbank Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, December 10, 2001; Page
> A01
>
>
>
> Imagine the unimaginable: The president, in the White House, the vice
> president, at the National Observatory, and all Cabinet members, in their
> respective agency headquarters, are killed in a terrorist attack on downtown
> Washington. So are all members of Congress, except the few who happen to be
> out of town.
>
> What happens to the Republic? At the moment, the answer is alarming: chaos.
> The Sept. 11 attacks and subsequent release of anthrax on Capitol Hill have
> left many lawmakers and constitutional experts concerned that the federal
> government does not have adequate succession and continuity plans in place
> to recover from a catastrophic terrorist attack on Washington.
>
> Current contingencies, designed during the Cold War and based on an
> intercontinental nuclear strike for which there would be warning, offer
> limited guidance for the government in the case of a nuclear, biological or
> chemical attack by terrorists that devastates all three branches.
>
> The Sept. 11 attacks brought the problem to light. Although such an event is
> highly unlikely, there is no plan for replacing the president, the House of
> Representatives and the top echelons of the judiciary if virtually the
> entire federal leadership were to be destroyed.
>
> The changes since Sept. 11 have been mostly logistical. Vice President
> Cheney is often taken to a "secure undisclosed location." All members of
> Congress and some top aides have been given BlackBerry devices allowing them
> to receive immediate, confidential information about a security threat or
> evacuation plan. The House has ordered the wiring of an alternative meeting
> place at Fort McNair in the District if the Capitol cannot be used.
>
> But several people who have studied the scenarios said these adjustments
> fall far short of what is necessary. Current law allows only for special
> elections in the case of House members, which would take weeks, although
> senators can be replaced by their state governors.
>
> "We have to realistically think about something more catastrophic," said
> Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.), who has proposed a constitutional amendment
> allowing governors to appoint new representatives if a large number of
> lawmakers were killed or incapacitated. "If somebody hits us in a severe and
> coordinated attack, there will be great confusions and possibly a
> constitutional crisis."
>
> Norman Ornstein, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, called
> current government preparations "utterly irresponsible." He favors a version
> of Baird's proposal and revisions to the Presidential Succession Act of
> 1947 -- possibly adding state governors into the line of succession. "It's
> about having a Congress and having a president at a time when you need it
> most. There are a lot of times when every single person in the line of
> succession is inside the Beltway, and we live in a time where it's
> conceivable to lose everybody inside the Beltway."
>
> Long before Sept. 11, the federal government planned for the unimaginable.
> President Bill Clinton's National Security Council had an aide who handled
> nothing but continuity-of-government issues, his work shrouded in secrecy.
> Aides to President Bush say they had been contemplating changes to assure
> continuity in government even before this fall's attacks. Those involved in
> the discussions were not permitted to be interviewed, and the White House,
> citing security concerns, declined to discuss any proposals.
>
> "We continue to take a look at those plans and see what steps need to be
> taken, need to be changed," a White House spokeswoman said. "A lot of these
> plans that were fashioned and formed based on the Cold War, while needing to
> be fine-tuned, are not irrelevant."
>
> The administration last month proposed to Congress an emergency spending
> procedure that would allow the president, in consultation with congressional
> leaders, to continue government operations for 30 days at existing funding
> levels if spending authority expires during a crisis when Congress cannot
> convene.
>
> The White House dropped the proposal when congressional and administration
> aides could not agree on the structure of such a mechanism. Congress was
> willing to give the president such authority if congressional leaders from
> both parties agreed, but lawmakers said they balked when the White House
> sought permission to act only after consulting the House speaker.
>
> John Feehery, spokesman for House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), ruled
> out constitutional changes such as Baird's proposal. "We've had no
> discussions on moving any legislation," he said. "We don't think there's any
> movement toward having a change in the Constitution."
>
> Still, even those who oppose a proposal as lofty as Baird's see need for
> change. Rep. Victor F. Snyder (D-Ark.) said he objects to the amendment
> allowing governors to name representatives in a crisis because "we ought to
> be very cautious about doing away with this important quality that our
> framers intended of House members being elected." Even if all but a few
> representatives were killed, "I do not see that the government would cease
> functioning," he said.
>
> Instead, Snyder wants to encourage states to revise special-election laws to
> allow them to expedite elections to replace representatives who die.
>
> The government has long had precautions to protect those in line of
> succession, most visibly the practice of keeping one Cabinet member out of
> the House chamber for the State of the Union address. But many Cold War
> practices -- such as building a bunker for lawmakers to meet beneath the
> Greenbrier resort in West Virginia -- assume there would be warning before
> an attack.
>
> But if terrorists using the element of surprise were to wipe out the
> government, "we don't have anything in place that would deal very adequately
> with that matter," said David E. Kyvig, a constitutional historian at
> Northern Illinois University. "That could be a cause for chaos."
>
> The framers understood conventional warfare, but not terrorists armed with
> germs and nuclear devices. "James Madison was not exactly in tune with the
> nuclear age," Kyvig said.
>
> Among the ideas lawmakers and scholars are pondering:
>
> Rep. James R. Langevin (D-R.I.) proposes an "eCongress" system, a secure
> computer system for voting and communicating among members of Congress if
> they could not meet at a single location because of an emergency. He seeks
> permission from the House Administration Committee to study the possibility.
>
> Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) proposes changing the presidential succession
> line so that if the president and vice president were to die, a previously
> designated congressional leader from the president's party would assume
> office. Currently, succession goes to the House speaker and Senate president
> pro tempore, then to members of the Cabinet.
>
> Ornstein favors a variety of reforms: more meeting places for Congress
> outside Washington, a law designating a court to replace the Supreme Court
> if the justices are killed and replacing the Senate president pro tempore
> (usually the oldest member) with the majority leader for purposes of
> succession. Ornstein would also add governors to the succession, most likely
> by state population.
>
> Baird, probably the most aggressive lawmaker on the subject, favors
> alternative meeting places for Congress -- and not merely Fort McNair, which
> would likely be destroyed by the same nuclear bomb that would destroy the
> Capitol. Congress could meet in state capitals, he suggested.
>
> Baird's top priority, though, is the quick, temporary replacement of
> lawmakers killed or incapacitated in a terrorist strike if more than 25
> percent of the chamber is affected. Technically, the House could operate
> with only a few members, because the law requires only a majority of members
> to be present for a quorum.
>
> But, Baird said, "if we have a House of Representatives that's in the hands
> of four or five people, we've done a disservice to the framers." More than
> 30 similar proposals had been offered during the Cold War without success,
> according to the Congressional Research Service.
>
> Baird said Bush seemed "very interested" in the plan and suggested Baird
> take it up with Cheney.
>
>
> © 2001 The Washington Post Company

For archives see:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/