Attorney Notes Pages 1662-1664

    /6Ot-- @,UGZ-Z&
t In eum. an "effects" trx,t under amended section 2 would likely
lead to the widespread restructuring by-Federal courts of electoral
oiocedu.es and systems at all levels of Government-from the U.S.
Houee of Representatives to local school boards-on no more than
a finding that the electjon system is not designed to avoid dispro-
portionate election results.- 

Most would agree that racial and other minority groupc can be
and often are represented effectively by nonminority officeholders.
It is commonplace for officeholders with majority white constituen-
cies to seek support_ from and provide services to minority Froup
oonstituents. Thus, the premise that proportional representation is
neoessary in order to protect the rights of minority groups is falla-
clol,ls.

From the time our Constitution was-written, we have rejected
proportional representation. Alexander Hamilton, in the Federalist
Papers, No. 35, addressed this question in an analogous context in
evaluating the proposition that each segment of society should be
represented by someone of its choice "in order that their feelings
and interests may be the better understood and attended to." But,
Hamilton continued, "this wiil never happen under any arrange
ment that leaves the votes of the people free." To this sobering
fact, he added:

"Is it not natural that a man who is a candidate for the favour of
the people and who is dependent on the suffrages of his fellow-citi-
zens for the continuance of his public honors should take care to
inform himself of their dispositions and inclinations and should be
willing to allow them their proper degtee of influence upon his con-
duct? This dependence, and the necessity of being bound himself
and his posterity by the laws to which hb grves hii assent are the
true, and they are the strong chords of slrnpathy between the rep
resentatives and the constituent."

A candidate for public office couid afford. of course, to ignore a
sizable voting minority when that minority was prohibited,
through iiteracl, t€sts and other devices from registering to vote, as
was the case u'ith blacks in the covered jurisdictions when the act
was passed in 1965. As I previously noted. however. the Voting
Rights Act outlawed sucb test.s and devices, and registration and
voting of racial and Ianguage minorities in the covered jurisdic-
tions have increased to the point that the political strength of
these groups can no longer be ignored by serious candidates.

An "effects" test in section 2 threatens to undermine a basic
principle of our democratic system of Government; namely, that no
Broup, whether defined by political interests, party affrliation,
racial characteristics, or anything else, has a right to be represent-
ed on elected governmental bodies. As the Supreme Court has
stated:

"[A]l] who participate ir, [anl election are to have an equal vote-
whatever their race, whatcver their sex, whatever their eupation,

I
I

(

1663

it'&"Jrtli,:;T::::''' rhe conc,
.?i:i,AXT.oho*:'JlT'"";;';;;'"i'l1H:fi i"?f m':r:l,fr:

siff l,:il,ei,;#,ru;'l"t"x1:gJt:rm*: j::T,:#?,-;irJl

Al6/-
O Senator Hercn. Thank you, Mr. Reynolds.

f,et us addreas a few qu&ti6ng now."

--Just 
how significant ai issue is the proposed change in section 2?

T:-flt"gryrj91gral,iaIF;ei1i"i-.i"tiy,-a"rl"iu"t-tr,""i.opos"aclange trom an intent standard to a resu[ts standard a ,,dia#atic,
cnange.

P_o yru agree or disagree with him?
- Mr. RrvNor,os. I agree that it is a dramatic change. I think thatit has the potential- Tor terribry d.amatic "r-in"iiir"; ;il conse-qr.gl""p as I spelled out in theitatement that t j"st-i"""1---

we do see it as a -marked departure from whdt thd hw has beenin the pas! .an{ a tundamentdt ctrange i" tt " [*i. "'ieh;'ih"t i,guaranteed in the lbth amendment, wiich is ttre ris[t-t3-"tt", r"""from discrimination.

^ llf..ITge_in section,2 would change that fundamental right toa rrght to have certain election raults rather than simply the"rightto cast your vote free of racial discrimination.j--Sa-^+^- .-