|
The fight for equal representation took
many years, and it is now history, of
course, but it seems to me that the adop-
tion of single-member districts as we have
already done is a furtherance of the one-
man, one-vote principle because all we are
talking about on this whole subject is that
people be represented in a representative
form of government, and the single-mem-
ber district guarantees as best we can that
every section of the State will have a
chance to have a member in the House of
Delegates who will look after their inter-
est. Therefore, it seems common sense to
me that we should maintain the position
that we have taken and that it will not
allow a situation that I can see developing
in my county, for instance, where a city is
being built and which in a few years will
have about two-thirds of the people of the
county. I want those people to have the
representatives which they are entitled to,
but I do not think they should have the
right to dominate the whole county and
have all of the representatives. This is a
situation which would be repeated in many
parts of the State.
Therefore, I urge the rejection of this
amendment.
THE PRESIDENT: The Chair would like
to recognize the presence in the gallery of
the Honorable Herbert R. O'Conor, Jr.,
former Delegate to this Convention and
now alternate Delegate to the Assembly
of the United Nations.
(Applause.)
Delegate Lord.
DELEGATE LORD: Mr. President, I
would like to yield three minutes to Dele-
gate dark's seat mate, Delegate James.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate James.
DELEGATE JAMES: Mr. President and
fellow members. I would like to direct my
remarks to two points: first the problem
of redistricting.
I served for a couple of years as Chair-
man of the Reapportionment Committee of
the Legislative Council and I found that
there were several factors which militated
against an efficient legislative redistricting.
One, of course, is that every member has
a built-in selfish interest in his own dis-
trict. This is reenforced by the fact that
his own constituents want him to have this
selfish interest, because they become used
to the district; they do not want to change,
and so it is comfortable.
Thirdly, because of friendship there is
not the willingness on the part of the mem-
|
bers to do drastic things to other fellows
districting.
The problem of redistricting is com-
pounded in the General Assembly as you
increase the number of districts. Now, it is
even difficult to draw 40 senate districts,
but when you attempt to skyrocket that to
120 districts, you are really giving the Gen-
eral Assembly great problems. You almost
slant things in favor of the commission
plan because if they have to draw 120 dis-
tricts it is almost going to be a legislative
impossibility to change the commission
plan.
This matter should be a legislative re-
sponsibility. The single member districts
would be advisable in large geographical
areas where counties are combined. On the
other hand, where the population is im-
pacted, your multi-member districts would
be advisable.
THE PRESIDENT: You have half a
minute.
DELEGATE JAMES: The main thing
is visibility and availability. The General
Assembly, if given proper discretion, can
provide visibility and availability by a com-
bination of districts.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I yield
three minutes to Delegate Hanson.
DELEGATE HANSON: Mr. President,
I believe that Delegate James has given
better reasons for single member districts
than for multiple-member districts. The
amendment before us provides for the in-
cumbent political leaders a do-it-yourself
apportionment kit which is kind of a gerry-
mander's delight. What it permits is for
the incumbents to decide whether or not
they are better off with two-member dis-
tricts, or one-member districts, and adopt
them for the counties. Because of the leg-
islative courtesy Delegate James described,
the plan developed by each individual dele-
gation will be the plan adopted, and the
plan adopted will be the plan which has as
its central rationale the perpetuation in
office of the people who drew the plan.
The reason for this is to permit the mem-
bers of the General Assembly to remain
instead of to change when when the char-
acter of the population changes. The plan
proposed is one which has as its central
functioning rationale the retention of the
political status quo, no matter how much
the state or political jurisdictions in that
state may change.
|
