Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
This resolution proposes a change to the U.S. Constitution to let House members name backup designees who can temporarily fill their seat if they die before their term ends. Each Representative would provide a list of at least five qualified designees after taking office; if the Representative dies, the state's chief executive would pick one from that list within ten days and the Speaker would seat that person until a special election. The temporary designee would have the same powers and status as any Representative while serving. If three-fourths of state legislatures ratify this amendment within seven years, it would become part of the Constitution.
As a proposed constitutional amendment, it must be approved by both chambers under their constitutional amendment process and then be ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures within seven years; it would not be sent to the President.
This proposed constitutional amendment requires each Representative, immediately after taking the oath, to file a list of at least five qualified designees.
If a Representative dies during the term, the state chief executive must select, within 10 days, one person from that most recent list; the Speaker then seats that person temporarily until a special election fills the vacancy.
Designees receive full rights of a Representative while serving, and designees themselves must have submitted their own lists in case they die while filling the seat.
Constitutional amendments changing representation rarely advance without broad bipartisan consensus; subject is controversial despite low fiscal impact.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear, limited-purpose constitutional amendment and supplies a basic mechanism for temporarily filling House vacancies caused by death, but its construction provides only moderate specificity and leaves substantial implementation, interaction with existing law, edge cases, and accountability unaddressed.
Progressives emphasize democratic legitimacy and voter choice concerns
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize democratic legitimacy and voter choice concerns
Likely skeptical or opposed: appreciates continuity but sees this as a diminution of voters' power to choose their Representative.
Concerns focus on bypassing special elections and potential for unaccountable appointments or cronyism.
Mixed but cautiously receptive: values rapid restoration of representation and functioning Congress, while worried about democratic legitimacy and procedural safeguards.
Would prefer specified timelines and transparency to balance continuity and voter choice.
Generally favorable: values continuity of government and swift seat restoration, and views governor selection from a Representative-provided list as respecting state authority and the Representative's preference.
Sees this as practical and limited in scope.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Constitutional amendments changing representation rarely advance without broad bipartisan consensus; subject is controversial despite low fiscal impact.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize democratic legitimacy and voter choice concerns
Constitutional amendments changing representation rarely advance without broad bipartisan consensus; subject is controversial despite low f…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear, limited-purpose constitutional amendment and supplies a basic mechanism for temporarily filling House vacancies caused by death, but its construc…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.