|
I would like to speak to some of my
friends from the smaller counties who
have been concerned that the small coun-
ties were going to fare ill with a reappor-
tioned legislature, and point out with my
own example, and I do not believe I have
been accused roundly of being an inordi-
nant friend of the small counties. But from
my own situation, from a multiple-mem-
ber district I helped about 180,000 people.
Within that district are some of the rural
areas of my county, and I think it is fail-
to say that I do not represent those areas
as well as the delegate from those areas
would represent the point of view of the
people who lived there.
Yet, so long as we have multiple mem-
ber districts, we are going to balance in
all of the growing and urbanizing counties
in the State the ticket in such a fashion
that all of the delegates are going to come
from the urbanized areas, or reflect the
views of the people who live in urbanized
areas.
If you are interested in representation,
if you are interested in the rural areas
having their rightful voice in the General
Assembly, I submit the only way they will
achieve it is through a system of single-
member districts.
I think, Mr. President, that if we are to
have every citizen equally represented in
the General Assembly, if we are to allow
our Genral Assembly to be a faithful re-
flection of the will and the interest of the
people of this State, we will retain the
report of the Committee of the Whole. We
will retain single-member districts, and we
will not adopt this proposal which has been
presented, which again I believe is an open
gerrymandering kit for the incumbents.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Lord.
DELEGATE LORD: Mr. President, I
yield four minutes to Delegate Byrnes.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Byrnes.
DELEGATE BYRNES: Mr. President
and members of the Convention: Delegate
Hanson has touched upon the critical issue
we present to you. We require in the future
flexibility. Characteristics do indeed change,
and it is a single-member district mandated
throughout the State which will create the
chaos and gerrymandering, as they try to
adjust the districts.
The essence of our position is simply
this. We have brought to you all of the
objectives that were sought by the Legis-
lative Committee: short ballot, higher
|
visibility, increased minority opportunity,
sharpened responsibility. Once we achieve
these objectives we begin to look at other
values.
The other value that we try to direct
your attention to, and that is the issue
simply stated, of a parochial legislature.
It was too blithely passed off by Chairman
Gallagher, but not so blithely passed off
by others.
Scholars indicate single-member districts
create a parochial atmosphere. An editorial
in The Morning Sun in support of the sin-
gle district said:
"It is even possible that his constituency
would be made up primarily of his friends
and relatives. Some districts might be so
small that his friends and relatives by
themselves could get him elected. So it
would be hard for him to avoid a parochial
point of view. Nor does it follow that this
parochial-minded fellow would be disposed
to ignore the interests of the city as a
whole. Only when what is best for the city
conflicts with what is best for his neigh-
borhood would parochialism be the deter-
mining factor."
That is incredible, and yet they still sug-
gest that single-member districts is a fine
policy.
In Ohio they tried it, and the Cleveland
Plain Dealer promoted single-member dis-
tricts for months, and then they tried it,
and then the Cleveland Plain Dealer said
this: "Not a single voice could be heard
to speak for the view of the county."
This is one area where the proponents
decided after trying it, that it was a mis-
take at least in that respect.
I suggest to you that we offer the great-
est possible flexibility in districting, and if
there is a mistake with three-member dis-
tricts, it will not be quite as disastrous as
it would be with the single-member dis-
tricts.
What is the parochial system? It is not
an interest in local legislation, nor a philo-
sophical matter. It is a practical response
to legislation. It makes common sense that
a person who is representing the view of
50,000 voters is certainly going to have a
broader range and a broader perspective
than a person who is representing 33,000
people.
We have never argued that a single-
member district will consist of a few blocks
or of a few apartment buildings. We simply
say that a person guided by 7,000 voters
|
