Miscellaneous Legislative History

    U^f^ I-r'{.*,-a - ge{L n(

mtnority electoral suceess and racial bloc voting' ApPellants

contend flrst that the electlon of some blacks to offlce ln the

challengeddlstrlctsProvesthattheuseofmultl-memberdis-
trtcts dld not result ln denial of equal oPportunity for mlnorl-

tles.to participate ln the political Process' APPeIlants' Brlef

at 24. This argument 1s contrary to @ngressr clearly exPressed

legislative intent and inconsistent wlth the objectives of the

voting Rights Act Amendnents of 1982. Since the appellants have

falled to raise any genuine 1e9a'1 lssues regarding the dlstrlct

courtrg treatment of minority electoral success' lts flndings are

properly evaluated under Fed. R. clv. P. 52(a)ts clearly errone-

ous standard.

The text of the senate RePort ltself expllcitly disavows the

proposltlon Ehat the success of a few black candidates will

.foreclose the possibility of a finding of racial vote dllution'

S. Rep. at 29 n.115 (guoting

1307 (5th ctr. 1973)).4 This statement of legislative intent is
zimmer v. McKeithen' 485 F.2d 1297t

Comm. on the Judiciarv, 97-\h 9oD9', ?A- Sess' 1555-1850 (1982)

(Statementorffi'o-ilraatoran6yno1ds)[hereinaftercitedas
@1.

4th" Department of Justice argues in its brief that the
Senate Report ;cannot be tilien as 6eterminative on all countsr'
and that the statements of 6"n"Lor DoIe must instead 'F" given.
particular weight.' Brief i.i-it" United States as Amicus Curiae
Supporting ApilIiants-it e n.f Z, 24 n.49 [hereinafter cited as

Br. for U.S.]. This is a curious algullleni to make.glven that the
first sentence of Senator DoIe's additional Views itself states:
'The Committee i;d;a is an accurate statement of the intent of
s. 1-gg2r ds .;p.;E;a by tne iommlttee' n s' ReP' at 193 (Addi-
tional Views of Senator Ooiei, SeS also S. Rgp: at 199 (Supple-
mental views of senator Grassley, cosponsor of DoIe comPromise

amendrnenr) ('I am wholly.iiiitila "itn the bilI as Ieqorted Uy

the Committee and f con"o.-t itf, 
-tf," interPreta tion of this action



consistent rrith the general language of the statute itself' which

addresses lngggA-ljly of oPPortunity !o partlcipate ln the

politica)- pEoc€ssr and is not limlted to absolute denial of

partlciPaElon.Furthermore,thedisclalmeringectlon2expllc-
ltlystatesthaE"[t]heextenttowhichmembersofaprotected
class have been elected to office is tone circumstancer which may

be considered. . ' ' ' 42 U'S'C' S 1973' This language

obrvlously contemplates the posslbility of successful vote

dilution claims nothwlthstanding limited minority victories at

t,he poLIs. As the zjnner court stated quite clearly: nwe shalL

continue to require an lndependent consideration of the record'n

485F.2dat1307,quotedi.Es.ReP.aE29n.115.
APPellants,inslstencethatthecourt'sanalysisofminority

electoralsuccessisenoughinitselftorequirereversalls
misguided.Thequestioniswhetherthecourt'slndependent
considerati.on of the totality of circumstances' including as one

intheCommitteeRepo,..n):Itishard.toimaginewhytheSenate
Report shourd not be regarded*i.-In--"oihoritative pronouncement

of'Iegistarive iit"ntl 6i1ii-ii-fras been endorsed by the sup-

porters of the original biii, 
-"='-r"rl. 

"? by the ProFPnents of the

lompromise "*!nar"ni. 
ruri-n!tiot", it is ire1I-estanlished that

nreports of "o*riii"i. 
of ithel House or senaEe ' ' : may be

resa rded as an expositio" ,ii"ii," f egislative intent in a case

wh6re otherwise t-he meaninq-oi a stitute is obscure' n DuoIex

printinq press co. v- oeerini', is' ifa' 443' 474 (1920)' rn
f act, it is the goverlmentffexilnsive t"r iance on the statements

of witnesses before the senlte--iommitt""-on the Judiciary which

is mispraced. S.s nrrs! e.'Eiisi-:-. _iie r'.'t"i aet , 425 u' s' 18s ' 203

n.24 (1975) ('R;;;rffiae.G_[r,E course of 1e9is1a-

tive debat,e or hearings ot;;; inun by persons resPonsible for the

prepararion oi I;; ariftinq-of a bili' are entitled Eo litt,e
weight. o) ; Mccauonn v' RerEnlY ihqcqrege co' ' 28-3 -U' 

S' 488'

4 g3-g4 (193 O) (statements.i'made to committees of conoress

. . . are without weight in--.irre inte.pt"iiLion of a itatute' n)