Redistricting Still Plagued by Confusion Article in the Congressional Quarterly

    Politicse

G,

The Last Few Seats in the House
If 7,300 more people had responded to the Census Bureau in Indiana

Iast year, that stste would be spared a painful political decision it now
faces. And New York would be an even bigger loser than it seems likely
to be. Every decade, the reapportionment process produces its share of
near-misses and close calls. But it never gives any state credit for "almost."

For the last four decades, the 135 seats in the House of Representatives
have been distributed among states by the method known as "equal pro.
portions."

Every state is given one seat, and then a fixed formula churns out
"priority numbers" for each state to get a second seat, a third seat,
and so on. The priority numbers are listed in order, and states are given
seats in that order until all 435 have been distributed.

This year, the last state under the wire was New York, which just
missed losing six seats instead of five. Indiana just missed keeping its
Ll seats, and is scheduled to drop to 10.

Ironically, New York is the state making the loudest plea for an
adjustment in lhe census figures. Slate officials assume any adjustment
for an urban undercount would help New York more than it would help
most other states. According to the Census Bureau, however, it is highly
unlikely that an adjustment would give New York another seat. For that
to happen, New York would have to get I large adjustment while nearly
all other states received small ones.

But, adds Census Bureau statistician Sam Davis, "It's hard to tell.
Anything can happen." The formula works in funny ways, and even a
small adjustment might be enough to shift a congressional seat from one
state to another.

If the adjustment is minor and evenly distributed among states, any
seat changes would probably involve the states listed below. These are
the five which got the last seats, and the five which just missed getting
an extra seat.

The last five seats went, in declining order of priority, to Kansas,
Pennsylvania, Colorado, Ohio, Florida and New York.

The five on the "waiting list" are, in order of priority, Indiana, Ceorgia,
California, Alabama, and Missouri.

In that case, states will probably have
to follow the process outlined in fed-
eral law: Those states that have nei-
ther gained nor lost House seats will
elect members from the old districts:
states that have gained seats will also
elect members from the old districts
and lill new seats in at-[arge elections;
and states that have lost seats will
elect their entire delegation at large.

That prescription would be par-
ticularly painful in the states losing
seats. IL could, for instance, force an
urban legislator like Rep. Benjnrr,in
S. Rosenthal, D-N.Y., to grub for votes
in upstate New York.

But, Rosenthal. like many others,

<(,ra(rl lil <crc.lts.r o^.r!atr rt<.
b&rk- *-.. 

-.-t 
t -r-.h

has confidence in the federal judicia-
ry's ability to clear the roads in time
for 1982 congressional elections. "The
courts are responsible, and the courts
will deal with the challenges expedi-
tiously," he says.

Seventeen House seats are slated
to shift flrom states in the Northeast
and Midwest to those in the South
and West. Census Director Vincent P.
Barabba says that even if the courts
force an adjustment of the figures, the
state-by-state distribution of seats will
change by one at most, and probably
not at all. (Bor, p. 7l)

The result of the past decade of
population changes. speculates politi-

Redistrictirrg Still Plagued by Confusion
The road to congressional redis-

tricting remains littered with obsta-
cles, despite two Supreme Court or.
ders last month enabling thc Census
Bureau to release its population fig-
ures.

There are still more than 20 court
suits against the bureau, most of
which demand that the national head
count be adjusted for members of rui-
nority groups missed by census takers.
The Supreme Court resolved none of
these disputes: it merely allowed the
bureau to report its numbers while
waiting for the outcome of the court
fights.

Beyond that problem lies a new
round of litigation over the actual
drawing of the districts. Plans for re-
districting will be subject to court
challenges in almost every state. Since
l9?0, the Supreme Court has reaf-
firmed its direction that congressional
districts in a siate be as equal in pop-
ulation as is "reasonably possible" -leaving districts with even the slight-
est population variation open to chal-
lenge.

Minority groups, better organized
than they were ten years agot are al-
ready planning to conte3t any plan
that dilutes their representation. They
will find willing allies in urban po-
litical lesders determined to limit the
erosion of their constituencies. Com-
mon Cause, the citizens' group, has
also promised to enter the process in
an effort to "minimize political ger-
rymandering."

In such an environment, delays
and detours are inevitable. As an at-
torney for the House Republican Re-
search Committee put it, "A single
federal judge can screw up the works."

Painf ul Scenarios
The most pessimistic prognostica-

tors envision a maze of litigation pre-
venting the 98th Congress from seating
itself in ..lanuary of 1983.

Not as farletched is the possibility
that the difficult and often painful
process of redrawing the nation's {35
congressional districts will not be com-
pleted in time for the 1982 elections.

-By Alon lglurray

Jen. 10. l98l-PAGE 69



cal scientist Norman Ornstein, will be
a net national loss for Democrats of
three to five seats.

"l don't think this is going to be
as dramaric a blow to the Democrats
as a lot of people think," says
Ornstein. He points out that most of
the states picking up new seats have
state legislatures controlled by Demo-
crats, and that, these legislatures will
attempt to minimize Republican in.
fluence when drawing new district
lines.

But Richard M. Scammon of the
Elections Research Center says the
shift of seats from Democrats to Re.
publicans is not so important as that
from urban areas to smaller cities and
suburbs.

"[f you move a seat from a big
city ghetto out to the suburbs, it
doesn't make any difflerence if you
elect another Democrat," says
Scammon. who ran the Census Bureau
during the l96os. "lts the hind of
Democrat you are going to elect. . , .
This is going to cut back on the rep-
resentation of people who have been
for liberal issues."

Politics - 2

In those terms, the political im-
pact of this round of redistricting is
likely to be large. Dozens of urban con.
gressional districts have lost popula-
tion in the last decade ro ourlying
areas. (Box, p. 73)

Slicing the Pie
The Ceosus Bureau sent state

population totals to President Carter
on New Year's Eve, along with a cal-
culation of the size of each state's new
congressional delegation. (Weehly Re-
port p.1)

Starting in February, the bureau
will begin to release much more de-
tailed data, breaking down the na-
tion's population. in some cases, as
far as the city.block level. The bureau
says it will release all Iigures by April
l, if allowed by the courts.

Those figures. however, will be
"unadjusted." If the ruling of U.S.
District Court Judge Horace Gilmore
is upheld on appeal, the bureau will
have to issue a whole new set of figures
statistically adjusted to account lor
those missed by census takers. A hear-
ing on the main undercount case

(CF&i lit <ff4t!&.r e^rrlAr r<.
a-d-- r-k- !S - - r.-r i €d.*

brought by the city of Detroit is sched-
uled in the 6th Circuit Court of Ap-
peals for February. The Supreme
Court is likely to review the caie.

"[ would think, realizing a deci.
sion is so necessary . . . the courts
would want to have a decision verv
quickly," said Commerce Departmeni
attorney Philip Freije. He said the Su-
preme Court might consider the case
before its summer reces{I, but could
also decide to wait unril the fall ses-
sion in October.

A Supreme Court ruling on the
Detroit case would probably resolve
the adjustment controversy and elimi-
nate most of the other suits against
the census.

lf the courts order an adjustment,
however, the adjusted figures would
not be available until November 1981,
according to the Census Bureau -leaving little time for the difliculr pro.
cess of redisficting.

A Matter of Politics
The redistricting process is a com-

plex one. The Census Bureau's maps
take up 31,715 sheets and are con-

(

(

LJ.S. House Districts After lgLz

r^ss. il o
8. r. 2

cori.6

r.!. rlo
otr. I

r0.8

l_l srerEs cArNrNc DrsrRtcrs

ffi srerEs rosrNc DrsrRrcrs

(Net Changes lndicated in Circles)

oqS
rawrr tr

P.{GE ?O-.;an. 10. t98l



Politics - 3

f
l
l
t:

1970
PoP.'

3,111,351
302.583

1,775,399
1,923,322

19,971,069
2,209.596
3,O32,217

548.104
756,668

6,791.118
1,587,930

769.913
713,0r5

I l,l10,28s
5, I 95,3e2
2,825,368
2,249,O71
3,220,711
3,611,637

' 993,722
3,923.897
5,689,170
8,881 ,826
3,806, I 03
2,216,991
1,677,623

691,109
t,485,333

1E8,738
737,681

7 ,171 ,112
I ,0 r 7,055

I 8,241 ,39 I
5,084,41 I

617,792
10,657,.123
2,559,163
2,09r,533

I 1,800,766
919,723

2,seo,713
666,257

3,926,018
I l,l 98,655

|,059,273
114,732

1,651 ,448
3,113,244
1,7!1,237
1,lt7,821

332,4 | 6

t980
PoP.'

3.890.06r
400,48 I

2,717,866
2,285,51 3

23,668,562
2.888.831
3,107,576

595,225
637,651

9,739,992
5,161,265

965,000
9.3,935

I I ,41 8,461
5,190,179
2,913,387
2,363,208
3,661,433
1,203,972
1,121,660
.,216,4a6
5,737,037
9,258,311
1,077,118
2,520,638
1,917,111

786,690
1,570,006

799,181
920,6 r 0

7.364,158
1,299,968

t7,557,288
5,874,429

652,695
10/97,119
3,025,266
2,632,663

tt,866,728
917,151

3, t 19,208
690, I 78

1,590,750
11,228,383

1,161,037
5l 1,,t56

5,316,279
4.1 30, 1 63
| ,919 ,611
4,705,335

r70,816

203,302,031 226.501,825

tl'i(urr arc the R*rdcna [\ry,ulolion (erclud,tn! qili3343 fj1'jn4 trt'gr'
vost ltr l97tt. t97! oppttrtutnmenl l o.r hasvd tn iivurn u hrch tncluded
: ia t ztnx lrc nt ot'ars"oi.

! filurer are lhc dpp.rli.nmeat populalion lrr ll#,t. Thre do not

I 1.4 435 435

iaclude citi :eat ldr,,nr ole.redr.
I Tht Dntnct fi Columbn is not included in delerainatna ol ap'

frttioQm(^1.
' Trildl clqulatirn lor lgill ond l9!0 includct lh. Dirttict ol Columbia.

State Population Totals, House Seat Changes

Alobomo
Alorko
Arirono
Arkonror
Coli[ornio
Colorodo
Connccticut
Dcloworc
Dirtrict of Columbio'
Florido
Gcorgio
Howoii
ldoho
lllinoir
lndiono
lowo
Konror
Kenlucky
Louiriono
Mqinc
Morylond
Mossochorcllr
Michigon
Minncrolo
Misirrippi
Misrouri
Monlono
Nabrorko
Nevodo
Ncw Hompshire
Ncw Jcncy
Ncw Mcrico
Ncw York
Norlh Coroliaq
North Dokoto
Ohio
Oklohomo
Orcgon
Pcnnrylvonio
Rhode lrlond
Soulh Corolino
South Dokolo
Tennerrcc
Tcxor
Uroh
Vcrmonl
Virginio
Wo:hington
Weri Virginio
Wircon:in
Wyoming

Unilcd Slotcr'

lc
Chongr

12.9
32.4
53. I

18.8
18.5
30.7

2.5
8.'6

- 15.7
43..1
19. I

25.3
32.1

2.8
5.7
3.1

5. I
r 3.7
r 5.3
13.2
7,5
0.8
a.2
7.'l

13.7
5.1

13.3
5.7

63.5
24.8

2.7
27.8

- 3.8
15.5
5.6
1.3

18.2
25.9
0.6

- 0.3
20.1
3.6

16.9
27.1
37.9
t 5.0
14.9
2l .0
l t.8
6.5

4t.6

1972
Horrro
Scslr

7
I

1
1

a3
5

6
I

t5
l0
2
2

21
II
6
5

7
8
2

8

t2
l9
8

5
l0

2

3
I

2

l5
2

39
II

I
23
6
1

25
2

6
2

8
24

2
I

IO
7
a
9
I

1982
Hour
Srofr

7
I
5
1

{t
6
6
I

t9
t0
2
2

22
l0
6
5

7
8

2
8
ll
l8

.8
5
9
2

3
2
2

l4
3

34
ll

I
21

6
5

23
2
6
I
9

27
3
I

l0
8
1
9
I

I 980
Scot

Chongcr

0
0

+l
0

+2
+l

o
0

+t
0
0
0

-I
0
0
0
0
0
0

-l
-l

0
0

-l
o
0

+l
0

-l
+l
-5

0
0

-2
0

+1

-2
0
0

-l
+l
+3
+l

0
0

+l
0
0
0

CFtCrr rrr CCqlSr AJ.alaitt nr<
bdE r€ F....r ar di-.1-. Jan. 10. t98l-P.{CE 7l



Politics . 4

sidered unwieldy by many states.
Texa.q alone is spread across more than
2,000 Census map sheets. Additional
data must also be acquired - not just
the census tigures, but a variety of
demographic and political data to be
used in drawing the districts.

The most difficult part of the pro-
ce3s, however, is political. Although
some states have bipartisan or pur-
portedly non-partisan commissions to
redraw state lines, final control is in
the hands of state legislatures in at
least 41 states, and every redistricting
srgument is the source of endless fac-
tional bickering.

A nationwide Republican cam-
paign to win new statehouses in prep-
aration for the critical redistricting
pmrcess had little success in the No-
vember elections. Democrats still con-
trcl 28 of the nation's state legisla.
tures, while the Republicans hold only
half as many.

Republicans, however, are already
hard at work forming coalitions to pro-
tect their interests when the new lines
are drawn. Highly sophisticated com-
puters and computer programs will
make the technical aspects of redis-
tricting easier this time around to per-
form, according to Warren Glimpse,
a private redistricting consultant.
That advanced technology, horvever,
may also make the political part of
the process more complicated.

For example, more detailed and
accessible census data will make it
easier to look at the distribution of
minorities in districts. Census Bureau
figures wiil give separate counts for
whites, blacks, Asians, American In-
dians, Hispanics and others.

That data, in turn, is certain to
lead to more disputes and more court,
cases concerning minority representa-
tion. The courts have clearly prohib-
ited rndenflonol discrimination when
dspwing districts. And for regions that
are covered by the Voting Rights Act
of 1965, they have also prohibited
drawing districts that have lhe effect
of diluting minority voting strength.

Computer districting may also
give new meaning to the Supreme
Court's "one man, one vote" rulings,
which requirc congressional districts
within a state to be as equal in pop-
ulation as is "reasonably possihle."
Computers make it possible to draw
districts with virtually no variation in
population size. Districts drawn to
such strict standards o{'equality, how-
ever, are more likelv to ignore existing
population boundaries, such as county
or precinct lines.

PAGE 72-.ran. 10. l98l

Consultant Clirnpse suspects that
partisan squabbling will also be more
bitter as a result of computer services.
Using data on the voting histories of
different areas, political parties will
be able to discern with much more
precision how a change in district lines
could affeet them. They may, as a re-
sult, debate over every line and corner
on the district maps.

The greatest redistricting prob-
lems are likely to occur in states slated
to lose House seats. Incumbent rep-
resentatives will be calling on their
friends in the state legislatures to pro-
tect their districts, and debates over
which districts are to be split apart
will be heated.

New York faces the stickiest task
in that respect. The state will lose five
seats - more than any state has lost
in a single census during this century

- and it is under t,he control of a
split legislature. The state Senate is
dominated by Republicans, while the
Assembly is Democratic.

New York has one of the most
advanced redistricting computer set-
ups in the nation - "a 'Star lVars'
system." according to one consultant.
But as state redistricting adviser Carl
Carlucci points out, "computers don't
make policy." Political powers will
battle each other lor primacy, and
those battles are likely to be more
messy and time-consuming than in the
past.

Undercount. . . or Overcount?
If the courts uphold Judge

Gilmore's order to adjust the census
count, census statisticians will have
to deal with two large problems.

First, testimony in .Judge
Gilmore's court last fall dealt largely
with the 1970 census, in which the
bureau's own research indicated cen.
sus takers missed 2.5 percent of the
population. More importantly, the bu-
reau estimated it missed 7.7 percent
of the nation's blacks, compared to
only 1.9 percent of its whites. Census
demographers arrived at their esti-
mates of the l9?0 undercount bv
matching the head count againsi
birth. death. illedicare and immigra.
tion records and other demographic
data.

But the 1980 census unexpectedlv
turned (,ut to be slightly higher r-han

the most reeenl estimate of the na-
tion's population derived from demo-
graphic records, suggesting an appar-
enl t)Ltercount rathcr than an under.
count.

Bureau officials are not suggesting

cor(rr tnr (o.6.a$g^r o..tttr (
f*trr.rr'l*--*--F.q t-E-.*

their census takers counted more peo.
ple than actually exist.

But Census Director Barabba says
the discrepancy is strong evidence
against the court suits claiming an un-
der.count.

Demographers at the Census Bu-
reau believe there is a hole in the de.
mographic estimsting technique. The
estimates do not record illegal aliens.
If illegal immigrants participared in
record numben during the actual cen-
sus - and the Census Bureau spent
thousands of do[ars last year to en-
courage them to do just that - they
could have canceled out an under-
count among legal residents. The bu-
reau might. in other words, have
missed several million legal residents
but made up for it in the narional
totals by counting roughly the same
number of new illegal aliens.

The Census Bureau has no way
of knowing how 65py illegal aliens
participated in its count. But without
such knowledge, any demographic at.
tempt to estimate an undercount is
questionable.

The bureau's technicians are toy-
ing with another method of calculating
the undercount. That method com-
pares the census totals to population
estimates based on an intensive ran-
dom sample of the population. But
George Hall, the bureau's associate di-
reclor for demographic fields, says
Census demographers are even less
comfortable with that method of es-
timation.

The bottom line, says Hall. is that
"we do not know how to measure the
undercount." But, he adds, if the
courts say to adjust, the bureau will
adjust.

The second problem with under-
count adjustment would arise when
the undercount is distributed among
specific localities.

Judge Gilmore directed the bu-
reau to adjust its figures at the "na-
tional, state and sub-state" levels. Ac-
cording to Hall. that means that where
states require block-by-block ligures,
each block will have to be adjusred
for an undercount.

If it uses the "synthetic method"
o[ adjustment discussed during the
court hearing. the bureau will deter-
mine the rate at which each popu-
lation group was undercountcC nation.
ally and then adjust the count lbr that
group by the same percentage in each
locality.

For instance, if the nationr+'ide
undercount of black females. age !5
to 35, was live percent. then one blirck



'\.

s

female of that age would be added
to every 20 included in a local count.

The validity ol that method of ad-
justment declines with the size of the
locality, statisticians say, and at the
block level becomes absurd.

Carl Carlucci of New York spec'
ulates ihat if an adjustment is finally
ordered, it will occur onlv at the state
level lor the purposes of determining
the number ,rf seats ,{iven each state.
Separare. unadjusted figures would

co-ut lil cclr(atlB.( cp..tlnt !t<
a-*E r-H- -* r - Pqtt *d.h

Polirig - 5

then be used tor drawing districts. "lt
would be tricky," he says, "but do-
able." .luclge Gilmore's otder. how-
ever, clearly requires "sub-state" ad-
justment, so that decision remains in
the hands of the courts. I

Districts With Maior Population Shifts

25 Top Population tosers
l9to
PoP.'

238,9.8
245,502
317,112
35r,t73
3{8,488
3se,550
361,881
36.,933
36,.,650
361,998
377,8t2
3E7,576
390,a 15
389,486
390,.16
.o3,067
4 r 8,082
396, I 25
395,632
392.278
39e,526
rl9,70l
.13,622
.o5,7&

127,8U

25 Top Population Gainers
l9ro
PoP.'

869,295
863,07r
865,345
867,537
828,4 I 4
775,421
721,710
712,157
707,622
706,184
&2,120
695,671
659,O77
650,558
677.O11
673,917
653,33.
626,910
6.0,515
620,76e
650,637
371,O87
653,008
7.O, I 88

6.3,3 t 3

1970
Pop.

147.582
465,O76
$7,726
.68.056
$2,581
167,759
.67,735
146,876
161,283
.62,]'31
.62,480
170,537
172.O11
170,267
467,636
478,3 l0
.91.693
ta?,t 68
165,990
.l5O,3lO
467,157
187,832
.79,280
u7,5t4

.r90,851

I 970
PoP.

152.848
452,965
461,325
.t66,336
152,t70
&5,254
1].3,573
1,l.3,201
152,O76
166.707
112,O24
$6,256
113,1t7
l1t,738
166,753
466,565
157,217
.39,399
151,776
1 2,589
161.o28
107,791
r66,359
529.688

162.610

Prcrnt
Choagr

-48.9
-38.6
- 32.1
- 25.0
-?1.7
-23.1
-22.5
-2 r.8
-2r.5
- 2l.l
- 18.3
-17.6
-r7.3
-17.2
- t6.5
- 15.7

- 15.5

-r5.2
-15.1
- 14.8

-ta.5
- 1..0
-13.7
- r3.2

- t2.8

P.r(.nl
Chongr

+92.0
+90.5
+86..1
+86.0
+83.2
+67.0
+62.7
+60.8
+56.5
+51.3
+49.8
+19.2
+18.7
+ 17.3
+45. t

+ 11.1
+ 42.9
+12.7
+4t.8
+40.3
+ 10.2
+40.0
+ 40.0
+39.7

+39. I

Oirrrict

Nrw YorL 2l (South Eronr)
Mi<higon 13 (Oownlovn Derroit)
Nev Yorl 12 (Noahrc:t Broollya)
Mirrcuri I (Norrh St. Lovir)
Ohio 2l (Clcvrlond 

- Eoo)
Ncw Yorl 37 ('i/cl 

- Suffolo)
Nrw York ll (Noahrrn Eroollyn)
Nrv York l9 (Monhonon 

- 
Horl:m)

lllircir 7 (Chicogo 
- 

Warr Sidr|
lllinoir I (Chicogo 

- South Side)
Ohio 2O (Wert ond Crnrrol Clcvrlond)
Pcnnrylvonio lr (Pinrburgh)
Pannsylvonio 3 (Ccnrrol Philodclphio)
Prnnrylvonio 2 (Wert Philodclphio)
Michigon I (Norrh C.nlrcl OGroil)
Pcnnrylvonio I (Philodrlphio 

- routh)
flnnora 8 (Mcmphir)
Michigon l6 (Soulh Ortroit, Oaorborn)
lllinoi: 5 (Chicogo 

- crntrol)
Xantucly 3 (touirvillc ond ruburb:)
Misouri 5 (Konror City)
Morylond 7 (Eolrimorc - 

w.rl, (?nltol)
,frlinn.sto 5 (Minncopolir)
Mi*ouri 3 (South St. Louir, ruburbr)
MorTlond 3 (8oltimor'rcuth ond orl, ruburbr)'

Mikulrli-O

Dirlrict lncurnbrol

Florido l0 (Foa Picrca, Foa Mycn) 8o{olir'R
Florido 5 (Clcoruoler, Orlondo) McCollum'R
Colitornio 43 (Son Dirgo orm) Strgrncr'R
fcxor 7 (Noahwot Horrir Counly) Archr'R
Florido I I (wr!l Polm B.o(h) Mko-O
Colilornio {O (Southcrn Oronga County) Bodhom'R
Arizono 4 (Noah Phocnir, Sconrdolo) Rudd.R
Arirono 3 (W"rlern Phocnir, Yumo) Slunp-O
Floddo t (Doyrono Bcoch) Choppcll.O
frxor 22 (Southern Horrir Counry) Poul.R
Colorqdo .l (North - Fod Collinr) Srown'R
Tuor 3 (Nonh Crnrrol Oollor) Collinr'R
Arirono 2 (South - fucron) Udoll'O
Colorodo 5 (Colorodo Springr) (romrr'R
lcror 2l (Sovth Crntrol - 

Son Antonio) lorfflrr'R
feror 2 (Eorf 

- 
Oronge) Wikor0

Gorgio 9 (Noahco:l - Goincrvillc) JcnLin:'D
Colorodo 2 (Ocnvcr ruburbr, Eouldcr) Wirrh'O
tlorido 8 ([okalcnd, Sororoto) lrolond'O
Arizono | (Southarn Phoenir, Mcro) Rhodo'R
Colilornio t (Norih 

- Chico) Choppic'R
Howoii 2 (Honolulu ruburbr, Outcr lrlondr) Alolo'O
Tcror 15 (South 

- Brownrvrllc) dt lo Gorro'O
Uloh I (Eor, 

- Ogdcn, Provo) Hoaron'R
Colilorrio 37 (Son Scrnordino. Rivcnidc cou.ri.t) 

1._ir.R
'trdtrq figv,.r

lacrrmb.0t

Gcrcia.O
Crockrn-O
Chirholm-O
Cloy-O
Srol..-o
NoroL-O
Richmond-O
RonEal-O
Collin*O
Worhington-O
Oolor-O
Coyn+O
lrdrrur-O
Groy.O
Conyrrr.O
Foglieno-O
Ford-O
Oingcll-D
torT-O
Morzoli-O
Eollinq-O
A,lilthcll-O
Sobo-O
Grphordt-O

Jan. 10, lg8t-PAGE ?3