Letter to Robert Pugh from Charles Ralston

    s 6560
tlonal repregentatlon wlth lacc-ravtng lau-
guage added lIL

As matten cutrently 8tand, therc la rn
"eftects" t€st for part ol the Votlns RlShtt
Act-Bo-6Ued "pre{leirence" lor Jurlrdlo
ttonr assertedly found cuUty ol dlscrlmlna-
tory conduct and requlred to purSe thcm.
selvcs. Thls s€ctlon hrr been spplted by thc
Department ol Justlcc ln a menner clearly
tendtng toward proportlonal representatlon.
fuily Justlfylng apprehenslons about the
lenguage promoted ln the House, Whet ls
not suggested ls that thls peculltr standard
be wrltten into the law ln general.

Some black srlokesmen have argued
agalnst the "effecls" apprcach, on the
grounds strtcd above es well as others. In
the usual pettern, however. thelr volces
have bcen drog'ned out ln the offlclal and
media cacoDhony. It begins to appcar thtt

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE
@mmlssloner, Slnce thc clvu rlghts sroups
could not prove that'the tntcno ol the rt-
large dlstrlcts war to keep bltch! out of the
commlsslon post, thc court threw out tho
sult. Wrttlng for tlre mrjorlty. Potter st€w.
art held th8t the "rtght to cqurl psrtlctps'
tlon ln the electorel pnooess do€s not protect
any'poltttcal 8iroups,' hosevcr deflned, lrom
electoral defeaL"

Wlth thts law, all thet ls ehanged. Any po-
llttcal ,urlsdlctlon ln the pountry wlth e 8lg-
ntflcant mlnorlty populetlon. end wlthout
adequate mlnorlty representatlon ln lts
elected offlccs, wlll be suspect, vulnereble to
court challenge, Gerrymandering nlong
raclal llnes wlll not only be legaltzed. It wlu
very neaily be mandrted.

By the LBw of Unlntended Consequences,
the vlctims of thls form of raclal politics wlll
be the same whlte llberals most enthusiastl.
cally endorsing lt. Mllttant blacks. searchlng
for an all-bl&ck dlstrlct thit can guarant€e
them permanent publlc offlc€, s,lll collsbo-
rate with white Republlcans anxlous to be
rld of Democratlc-vot{na black constltuents.
Together, they wlU re-segregf,te Amerlce.
The losers-the Pete Rodlnos, llberel whlte!
with large black constltuencles thet bla.k
pollticians went, but wlthout the proper
raclal characterlsttcg to bG sdmltted to the
Black Caucus.

One entertalnlng lldcshos, however,
should result from the new lsw. T'he same
old champlons of clv[ rlshtl who were for.
ever demandlng thsC lederil Judges redrsw
school boundarles to gpt Eore whltes ln
thelr schools wlll not be demandlng thst
the Bame federal Judge! redrsw the vottnSl
preclncts to get ell thee damn honkles out
of thelr electlon dlstrtct. Int€grBted lchools,
and seeiregated votlns dlstrtct& Thet's rrhat
It was all Bbout, wa^sn't lt?

And how was Ronsld Re888n prcvelled
upon to endotre, n8y ehbreoe, a meegure
polntlng dtrectly toward. lI not to, raclal
quotsn ln electoral polltlcs? Well, let'8 be
charltable and 8ry he wts preoccupled wlth
the Felklends-b€cruse I don't l,rnt to
thlnk sbouC the slt€riltlve..

Queltlou end An!ser!: lntcnt Y. Rcsult
Ttre votlng Rtghtr Act dcbrtc'wtll tocut

upon r propo8ed chrngc ln thc Act that ln-
volver one ol thc hort tDportrnt constltu-
tlonal lssues to comc belott Congreas ln
many yearB. Involved tn thla debate are fun-
damental lssue8 lnvolvlnS the naturc ol
Amerlcan reprcscntatlvc demrrrecy. feder.
allsm, clvll rtghta, end thc reparatlon ol
Dowen. Ttre folloirlng rnc quertlonr end en-
Bwet? pcrtrlnln8 to tbt! proposed change. It
ls not a glmple lssuc.

Whot b t||c mato? ,,,tre lnool*d ltt tlu
presai Votlng Rlghtt Act tt2fut ?

T'he most controveEhl lssue l! xhether or
not to change the strndard ln aectlon 2 by
whlch vlolatlor8 oI votlna rl8ht! rre tdentl-
fled fiom the prB€nt "lntent" st8ndErd to e
"re.sults" rtsndard. There b vlrtutlly no op-
posltlon ki extcndtng thc ptDvkloru ol the
Act or mrlntslnlng lntsct the bastc pnotec-.
tlonr rnd guarentee! of the AcL

Wto ts proposlng b c:l,,;agc thc sec,lort 2
ttondord,?

Although the populrr perceptlon ol the
lssue lnvolved ln the Votlng Rlghts Act
debste ls whether or not clvll rlghb sdvo-
cates Bre golng to be eble to preserve the
present Votlng Rtghts Act, the c€ctlon 3
lesue lnvolves r mrror chsngic tn tho lew
proposed by Bome ln the clvtl rlghts courmu-
nlty. Few are urglngi any retrenchnent ot
exlstlng protectlons ln the Votlng Rlghts
Act. The lssue rather ls whether or not ex-
panded notlons of ctvtl rlghts wlll bc lncor-
porated lnto the law.

Whot ls section 2?
Section 2 Is the Btstutdry codlflcatlon ol

the 15th Amendment.to the 'CorBtltutlorL

J; Junc 9, 1982

The t6th Amendmeni Drovtdes that the
rlcht ol eltlzcng to vote ghcll not be denled
oi abrtdged "on account of" raae or color.
There har been vtrtuelly no debste over 8ef,
tlon 2 ln the Dast because ol lts noncontro-
verslal objectlve!.

Does sectlon 2 opply only to "cooered" ttt
risdictlons?

No. Becauae lt ls e codlflcatlon of the 15th
Amendment. lt applles to all.Jurlsdlctlons
ecross the country, whether or not they are
a "covered" Jurlsdiction that ls requlred to
"pre-clcar" changes in votlng larvs and pro
cedrrrcs with the Justice Department under
sectlon 5 of the Act.

tAthot is the rclallonship bctaeen section 2
ond section 5?

Virtually none. Sectlon 5 requires Jurlsdlc-
tlon q ith a history of discrimination to
"preclear" all proposed changes in their
votlng laws and procedures \r'iLh the Justlce
Department. Section 2 restates the lSth
Amendment and applles to sll Jurlsdlctlons:
It is not limlted either, es ls section 5, to
chanocs ln voting la.ws or procedures. Exlst.
lng laws and procedures would be subject to
sectlon 2 scrutiny es well es changes ln
these laws and procedurcs.

What k the present lau uith recpect lo
scctlon 2?

The l8q wlth respect to the stendrrd tor
ldentllylng sectlon 2.(or 15th rdmendment)
vtolatlons has always been an lntent stand-
ard. As the Supreme Court rtefllrmed ln r
declslon tn 1980, "That Am6ndment prohlb
Its only purposefully dlscrlmlnatory denisl
or abrldgement by government of, the free-
dom to vote on account of raee or color."
Moblle v, Bold.en !t{8 U.S.55.

DtiI tlu Mobtle case end.t any change, ln
ealstlng lo?f.s?

No. Ttre lantuage ln both the lSth
Amendment cnd sectlon 2 proscrlbes the
dentel of votlng rlghts "on account of' race
or color. Thls has Blways been lnterpreted
to requlre purposelul dlscrlmlnBtlon.
Indeed, there ls no other klnd of dlscrlmtne-
tlon as the tcrm has tredltlonelly be€n un-
derrtood. Untll the MoDlle casc. lt rer
llmply not et llsuc thet thc 15th Amend.
ment end scctlon 2 requlr€d somc dcmon-
ltrrtlon of dhcrlnlnatory purpose. Therc lr
no decl8lon ol the Court elther Drlor to or
slncle JltoDl& that has cver requlred any-
thlnS other thsn an "tntent" strndsrd for
the l6th Amendment or sectlon 2.

Ho6nl tha Srpratu Cort tllllzed, o r?.stltt
bst prbt b 0u t{obll. decdon?

Noj Ttre Supreme Court has never utlllzed
r resultr (or En "eflebts" t€st) lor lndenttly-
lng 16th Amendment vloletlons. Whlle pru
ponents oftcn refer to the decklon of the
Court ln WhlU v. Regestcr {12 U.tl. ?5C to
srgue the contrary, thls h slmply rDt the
@.se, WhlU was not 8 8ecton 2 case and lt
wes not i lSth Amendment ca^se-lt was e
l{th Amendment case. Further, Ualtc re-
qutred dlscrtmlnatory purpose even under
the l{th Amendment. ThBt g/hltc requlred
puipose wa, relt€ret€d by the C6tm h
Moblb *td,lndeed. lt cias relt€rated by Jtt+
tlce Whlte ln dlssent ln Mobtlz. Justlce
Whlte was thc author ol tlre whlt v. Reget-
Cer oplnlon. Ttre term results appesrs nG
where ln Whtte it. Rcoestet There ls no
other court declslon elther utllldnS e results
test under sectlon 2 or the Flfteenth
Amendment.

Whol b ltu ctondard, for the tlth omand-
rnent's equal protectlgn clause?

The lntent standard has always applled to
the 14th amendment as crell. In Arllngton
Eelghts v. Metropolltan Authot'tta,.the Su-
preme Court ststed, "Proof of a ra.lelly dis-
erlmtnatory lntent or purpose ls requlred to
show I vloletlon of the equal protectlon
clause of the l{th smendment." {20 U.S.

Jut
253
nuD
Dat
Fee

r elcction quoins-in the 8lllse of clvil rlghts-
i,l may soon bc wedged lnto the statute law of
,l! 

- the Unl.ted States.
| -lp<,\a (,t NeA
I - S,rolv, REAGAT Rxlurrs on ExcEssEs oF
lr' ,/ vorrrrc Rrcrrrs ExtENSror
lli r'/ (Bv Petrtck J. Buchanan)
f, i "Today, t not onlv wented to aalute the
Ilt efforts ot those s'ho hive forsed the com'
Ill promlse, but I atso wsnt to Stvc lt hy hesrt,
II lelt support. Mv hope ls that lt slll now
I.l psve the way tosard sqrlft ext€nslon ol the
ft Votlng Rlghtr Act by the enthe Congress."
III wtth thet thlnly dlsgulsed concesslorL
II Ronald Reagan ran up the whlte flag over
II further reslstsnce to extenslon of the
II vottns Rlshts Act of 1965.
m To whlch reeson8ble men mlght respond:
II About ttme! what wa! Ronald ReaSan dotng
E temDorlzlnE over whether to extend the

ff 
.- 

mos-t 
rauccesstul 

clvll rtrhts 189 gver en'

E - weu, to be stmpltsttc about tt' he war pro-
m - 

crasttnattnc becsuse the new.Vottog Rlghtl
lU Act ol l98tha{ Icss to do wlth gusrsnteelng
IE blacl cttlzens thetr rtght to vote thrn lt doe8
E wtth guarsnteelng bleck DoUUctaDg t rlght
f to bc tlected. When Mr. Reacsn stgru ihlE'
I lcardrtlo& he end CoHrcar rnlll heve man.
I drt d the rrclal polerlzetlon ol Anerlcrn
E Dotttto tor the reri ol our ltvc!.
f - rhhk thrt'r cxttrmc? conslder shrt the
Et - revtred 1966 las lr deetgncd to iccomplbh.
Il The hore b€nlgn provklon, "pre+lear-
IIX rnce." wlll be extended lor e qulrtcr-cen.
I* tury. Under thb prDvlcto[ ntne Southern
If state!. thelr cltles, countter end rchool dls-
IE tdct! 

-wlU 
heve to contlnue reporttng to

lllt Washlngton tor Justlc.'r prtor ebproval ol
If anv chanse ln the electlon law!, no matter
Ifll frow tauat. Justlcc c8n vcto rni change lt
ftr. leels rrould "dttute" black votlng'rtght8-t.e.
IllE reduce the chances thst t bltck condldate
Ilt micht b€ elect€d.
III tinder a nerr proirlslon, however, rrhlch
trfl "strengthens"-the headllne word-the act,
lU{ every votlng dlstrlct ln the Unltcd Ststes,
IH I lrom Congrers to the state legtsleture. to
d'i'l the oounty councll, to the bosrd ol alder-
Ell men can be ordered redrswn by a ledera,l
[|t Judge, lf the "rerult" ol ssld boundertes ls to

H :H;Ui.lrce the rtsht ol black Amcrl-

Isll But ll every black who wants to regrtgter
ruI can reglster, lf every black who wtshes to
frll vote cir vote, how dan ttre electlon results
n{l be dlscrtmlnetory? Slmple my frlend. The
E*tl prtnclbal result thet henc'elorth vtll bc de-
El I termlnent lg how meny black lolk! got
I !l I nomlnated and hory miny Siot elected.
I :; I Thls provlslon was crafted to dump over I
I I dectslon of the Supreme Court ln 1980 deal.
'l i , lns wlth the ctty ol Moblle. Clvtl rlghts
i i I srouDs contended. accurdtely that even
, i ' though Mobile was 35 percent bl8ck, the
| .clty-ln its atlerge electlons for three ctty.

li i,,, , commlssloners-had never elected I black

oou
the
drs.
Onl
ha!
ordr

w
TI

aJr
den
wht
orI
def,
mal
fvh

D
lnt,

N
pre
tha
th€
lnc
ev€
or
fen
ha,
crll
pr('1
(,t
ho

I
'rEl
dal
acl
trt
:'b
rlg
prr
ev:

i
ta:

15
;rn

to
b€
lsl

?'
b(

;St
.E

dl
vl
ln

'al
A
rn
BI

,a
n,tr

'el

It
b

I

tr'r
c
a
e

,l
I

v
'a
.t
.t

'a/,l,*l tr l;a



c982 ;
f,t the
.denled
I color.
rer tGc,
bontro-

Jui g, 1989
258 (19??). rrrrr nei, icin rettintirt'tn r
nunUer ol other dectltoru, Wo4,hl1,,olmt v,
Daolt, 126 U.8. 229 (10?6); !f,osacJltueat, e.
Feaey, {{2 U.9.266 (19?0). In rddluoD. the
cdurt tias rlways been carelul to cmpharlzc
the dktlnctlon betee€n dc ltcto.nd dc rute
dtrctlntnratton tn thc srer ol lchool bu!tn8.
Onty dc Jure (or purporeful) dlrcrlnlnrUon
har-cvei been r brsb lor lchool budnS
orderr. I(cyer a. Dcioa", alt U"A.180 (10?3).
. Whotpr,tlcjr,cly b ltu "ltrbtrt" slanfurt?

Thc lntcnt ltanderd llrnply rcqulrca thet
r ,udlcl8l lact llnder evrluetc rU tlrc. pvl'
dencc avallabte to hlmseu on thc berb ol
whether-pr not lt demonstrates some lntcni
or purpdse or rrotlvatfon on the DBrt ol thc
defLndaht to act tn o dlscrtmlnstory
manner. It ls the trdltlona,l test lor ldentl'
lytn8 dlsctlrntn8tlol|"

. - 
DDcs lt rcq'/jlrt- ('pness conleu{d.,[, ql

la tcttt to dlt c dml no te?
No mott than 8 crlmtnd tr{el requlrc! er'

orcrs conlesslonr ol eullt. It dmply requlrer- 
ltrst r Judge or lury be rble to conclude. on
the barb ol atl ttre evldence svsllablc to lt,
tncludtng 4lrcumstantlal cvldenca ol whet,
ever Llnd, that some dt8crlmln8tory lntent
or purpose exlsted on the part of th9 dq
tenianl Eeversl msJor cssc! Elnce aobile
have had no dtfrlcult flndtng purposelul dlr'
crtmlnatlon wlthout a "smoklng 8un" or ex'
press confesslonr of tntent.' 

Thctt lt daa 7.ot requtta."nlnil'taod.lng"
ttj' Eorrrc oppon{]nts of thr "lntent" ttortd'ord
hooc awgcstad?

Absolutely not. "Intent" ls proven wlthout
"mlnd-readtn8" thousands ol tlmes every
day ot the week ln criminBl and clvll trlals
acioss the country' Indee4 the crlmlnal
trlgls the extstence ol lntent must be proven
"beyond a reasonrble doubt." tn the clvll
rlghts 8rea, the normal test ls that lntent be
proven merely "by a pr6ponderance ol the
evldence."

Hou can the lnteat ol long'dcod legkld'
to':s be d,etermlned, under the present test?
Thls has nevcr been necessery under the

15th amendment. It ls lrrelevant what the
intent mey have been of "lon8-dead" leglsla'
lors tf the alleged dlscrlmlnatory actlon le
belng malntained wrongfully by present leg'
lslatorB.

Wot ktnil o! eatdence con be used to d.am'
onstrate "lnteil"?
. Agaln, llterally'any klnd of evidence can
be used to satlsly thls requlrement' As the
Supreme Court noted ln the Arlingtort
Height case, "Determtnlng whether lnvl'
dious dlscrtmlnatory purposes was a motl'
vstlng lEctor demands a sensltlve lnqutry
lnto such clrcumstanttal and dlrect evldence
rs mey be svellable. 429 U.S. 253, 284.
AmonC the spectllc conslderatlonr that lt
mentlons are the hlstorlcrl beakground ol
sn actlon. the sequence of events leedlng to
r declslon, the exlstpnce of depBrtures from
normal proceduies,' leglslatlve hlstory, the
lmpsct of B declslon upon mlnortty 8roup8'' eta.

Do llox medn that tlu @tual lrnpd.t ot ef'
lects o! an actlon ilPort rnlnoritn grlottpt can
be consklered uniler tJu lntent test?' Yes. Unllke a resultr or effects'orlented
t€st, however, lt 1.8 not dlsposltlve ol B votlng
rlghts vlolatlon ln and of ttself, and lt
cannot effectlvely shlft burdens ol proof ln
gnd of ltself. It is slmply evldence of what'
ever forci lt. communlcates to the fact-
,lnder.

Why are some propos|ng to substltute o
neu "reilllts" test ln section 2?

Ostenslbly, lt ls argued that votlnS rlghts
vlolatlons are more difficult to prove under
rn lntent standard ihan they would be
uider a results standard.

....
...

CoNGiTESSIONAIqN,ECOND : SENATE
Conblctcly epertJ\om thc frct that thc

vottninfn-u Act hrr-uecn lrr eftectlve tool
lor combetlng votlru dtrcrlmtnstlon under
tho Drclcnt drndrrd, lt lr debatsble wheth'
cr oi not .tl ipDroprlrtc stqldsrd rhould bc
lrshtoned oE thc brdr ol whit lecllltrte!
rucc.ssfut prtorcsuuoDt EllDlnetlon ol the
"bcaond a rcaroublo doubt" ltandrrd ln
cAitnrt crrc. lor Gra,Eple. tould certslnly
lactutotc crlnlnel conYlctlou. T'lrc Nstlon
her chorcn not to.do tJrl! bcclurc therc arc
iimitttrri vetucq c.3. litimcrt ind duc nroc'
els.

trt7nat lr'tororao p!fit W ,ttrr tt standotd?
fqnt ot ell. lt lr totdly uncleer whst the

'reEults- rtendard lr alppoced to reDresenL
It b a st ndsrd totrlly unlnorn to present
law. To thc crtelrt that tt! leglrlettve hlsto'
rr lr rclevstrL urd to thc G:ttcnt thit lt l! de-
aimed to re*mblc rn c(fectr t€st' the maln
obJectlon lr thEt lt would egtsbltsh at a
stinasrd lor ldentfiylns rectlon 2 vlolettoru
.a "DroDorttonal. repregentatlon by race"
stsndard.

Whot It lruoni W 'rrogotllonal rcp"esen'
totlottbtt totc'l

The "proporttonrl reDrarentltlon by race"
rtsndard lr onc that cvslustes electorel ac'
tlorl! on tho btsh ol whether nor not they
contrlbutc to reDrclentatlon ln 0-State le8ils'.
latutt or r Ctty Counc[ or e County Com'
mlsslon or r gchool Board lor raclal and
ethnlc Sroup! tn proDortlon .to thelr num'
bel! ln the populEtlonr.

Wltot b urcng tolth "Ptoportlonal rcpre'
scnaallon by n'cc'?
It lr a concept ioteUy lnc{nslstent wlth

the tradlttonel notton of Amerlcan repre'
sentatlve government whereln elected offl'
clals represent lndlvldual cltlzens not raclal
or ethntc groups or bloce. In addltlon' 8s the
Court observed b Moblle, the Constltutlon
"does not requlre proportlonel representa'
tton as an lmperettve ol polltlcal orga,ntzs'
tlon." As Madbon observed ln the Federallst
No. lO, a maJor obJectlve of the dralters of
the Constltutton waa to llmtt the lnfluence
ol "factlons" ln the electoral process.

Compdre then the lntent and, lhe teeultt
test?'The tntent test ellows courts to conslder
the totaltty ol evldence surrounding an al'
leged dtscrlmtnatory actlon and then re'
qulres such evldence to be evaluated on the
basls ol whether or not lt ralses an lnfer'
ence of purpose or motlvatlon to dlscrtml'
nate. The results tegt. hoqrever. would focus
analysls upon whether or not mlnorlty
lJroups were represented proportlonately or
whether or not some'change ln votlng law
or procedure would contrtbute toward th8t
result.

wnit aoes tlt t rn 'd1.l,dt'Lmlnolon ft'
cttlk" rnoon?
It mearu nothlnS EorG thrlr lr meant by

the concept ol raclsl balance or raclal
quotan. Undcr tho results standard' actlons
would bc Judced, pure and slmple, on color'
conrclour,Sround!. Thls ls totslly at odds
wtth Gvelythlng thEt the Constltutlon har
been dlrccted towards slnce the Reconstruc'
tlon Amendment, Btou.tt v, Board. of Ed'uca'
t{oa end ttre Clv0 Rlghtr Act of 1964. The
term "dlscrlmlnatory results" ls Orwelllen
tn the sense thet tt radlcally translorms the
eoncept of dlscrlmlnetlon from a process or
B means to an end lnto a result or end ln
ttself. The results test would outlaw actlons
wtth s "dlsparate lmpsct"; thls hes vlrtually
nothtng to do wlth the notton ol dlscrlmlns'
tton as tr8dltlonally understood.

Isn't the "propoilonal rcpresentatlon by
race" dzscrtptlon an atreme d.escriptlon?

Yes. but the results test ts an extreme
tes!. It ls based upon Justtce Thurgood Mar-

. shall's dlssent ln lh.e LIobU. case whlch was
descrlb€d by the Court es lollows: "T?re
theory of thls dbscntlns oplnion ... sF

ocen to be thet cvcry lolltleal Siroup'or !t
ieart evcry nrch Sroup thtt l! ln the mlnor'
Ity har r ledent corutttutlonrl rlght to elect
cenatdater ln proportlon to ttr .nunbcr! "
tlre tloule Report ln dtscrtrstng thc prq
ooscd nbw "rsult!" t€!t. sdmltl thet proof
6t thc ebcencc of proportlonal reprer€ntr'
tlon "would bc hlghlY relevant".

But d.oan't the pioposctl neo sectlon 2
lotgruooc ctpttssly ilatt thot gr!.gortlonal
,N,]t?jtcnto,;lon {t t@t Ut owcttoc? .

Thert lr. tn tact. r dkcl8lher provlslon ol
sorts. It tr cteier. but tt ls r srrokescreen Ii
atstes, "The. lect th8t members of i mlnor'
Ity sroup have noi been elected ln numberr
equsl to the group's proportlon ol the popu'
t8tlou lh8ll not, ln and ol ltself. constltute r
vloletlon ol thlr rectlon."

Why ts thls lo,ngtoge o "smokcscnet"?
ltre key. ol course. 18 the "ln and ol ltrelf'

Iangnege.' In Moblb, Justlce Manhell
Bought to deflect tho'"proportlonrl reptt'
rentatlon by race" descrlptlon of hls resultl
theory wtth e stmllar dlsclelmer. Conslder
the response ol the Court, "The dlss€ntlng .

oplnlon seeks to dtsclalm thls derrtptlon ol
It,s theory by suggestlng thet a clalm ot Yot
dllutton may requlre, ln addltton to prool ol
electoral defeat, some evldence of 'hl,ctortcal
and soclal factors' lndlcetlng that the Sroup
ln questlon lB.wlthout poUtlcsl lnnuence.
I'Uttlng to the slde the evldent ,e.t thst
these Suezy eocloloSlcsl constderatloru have
no constltuttonal basls, lt remalns far from
certatn that they could, ln eny prtnclpled
menner, exclud6 the clalms of any dlscrete
group that happens for whetever reason, to
elect fewer of lts candidates than arlthmetlc
tndlcatrs thet lt ml8ht. Indeed, the putatlve
llmtts are bound to prove lllusory ll the ex'
press purposes lnformlng thelr Bppucatlon
rrould be, as the dlssent assumes, to redress
the'lnequltable dlstrlbutlon of polltlcal ln'
fluence'."

Erplaln lurther?
In short, the polnt ls that there wlll

always be an addttlonal sclntllla of evldence
to satlsfy the "tn gnd ol ltself" language.
Thls ts partlcularly true slnce there ls not
standard by whlch to Judge any evldence
except for the results standard.

'Whdt ad.dltlonol eoldencq along olth eol'
d.ence o! lhz lack ol proportionol represento-
tlor\ uould, sulfice to'complete o section 2
otolatlon und.er the tesults test?

Among the addltlonal blts of "obJectlve"
evldence to whlch the House Report refers
are a "hlstory of'dlscrtmlnetlon"' "raclslly
polartty votlng" (slc), 8t'large electlons' me'
Jorlty vote requlrements, prohlbltlons on
stngle-shot votlnS, and numbered posts.
Among other factoE th8t have been eonsld'
ered relevent ln thc past tn evaluatlng !ub''
mlsrlonr by "covered" Jurtsdlcttonr undbr
bectlon 6 ol thc votlng Rl8ht8 Act rre dltps''
r8te rdctsl reglstretlon flSures, hlstory of
EnSltsh-only bauots, mBldlstrlbutloN sery'
lces ln reclslly deflnable nelShborhoods'
BtaSgered electDr8l term!, some hlstory ot
dtscrlmlnatton, thc exlstence ol ducl school
systems tn the past, lmpedlments to thlrd
psrty vottng, resldency requlrements, redls'.
trtctlng ptans whlch lall to "maxlmlze" mt
norlty tnfluence, numbers of mlnortty reglg'
tratlon ofllclals, re-reglstratlon or regitstra'
tlon purgtng requlrement!, economlc costs
assocl8ted wtth reglstrstlon, ete;, ctc.

These lacton haoe been u.sed belorc?
Yer. In vlrtuslly every case, they hsve

been used by the Justlcb DepBrtment (or by
the courts) to sscertaln the exlstence ol dls'
crtmlnatton tn "coverqdr'Jurlsdlcttons. It ls I
metter of one's lmactffilon to come up wlth
addltlonal factors thftould be used by cre-
etlve or tMovatlve a6irrts or bureaucrat! to
Bstlsfy the "obJec'tlve" Iactor requlrement
of.the "results" test (ln addltlon to the ab

d,,t*
hc lSth t

llctlom
hey are
rlrd to
nd pru
I under

?ctlan 2
'a
lurbdto -
tlon to
n thelr "
Justlcc

re .16th
Itcttoru;
ln 6, to
i- nxbu
lutct to
hses ln

lPcct tD

[era ror
frdmentl
It rtend-
hed tn r
lprohlb
t dentsl
ihe frce.

I color."

lnoer tn
I

he 15th
fuee ttre
lof: ralc
brpreicd
hlnetlon
fcrlmtne-
peen un-
I it wbs
Amend-
demon-

There ls
lor to or
fed sny-
dard for

o rcsullt

r uttllzed
rdentlfy-
hlle pru-
n ol thc
3. ?63 to
llot thc

le end lt
.lt was a
Vhlt rc.
rn under
requlrcd
--ourt ln
t by Jus-

Justlcr'
V. Reget-
,e&n, no-
re ls no
a results
Iifteenth

\ omeill-
I

Dplled t0
lrllnstln,
the 8b.'

,e[y db
autred f6 I

rotectlon' :: Ho@ llnportant shoul.d that cortsld'ero,tlot
be?*T



lcncc ol Dropar6on8t rrepnesentrgm). Bcet belterc thet thc crcrtlo ol blacl'wgrd.e or , Votlng RlShts Act', 66 Ihe Prtb/;tc Lttrl1,est

tn hlnd 
".,.tn 

thrt tnc p'rfrilor-iiouvr.. ht"pdh;ird".-ui trioahc b crcrtc polltl- 19. DetanntnlnE whether or not a vote ls
tton behlnd ruch vottns aafieet-oi.,'rmrE cal-,,3hG0aoct;; ilt4pt?-tnc- lntluence ol "effecUve" or "dlluted" lr generallv deter'

ment! would be lrreleyrnL- 
-:--..'-- ;tnofnaEti urrur acutruc thrt blacl mlned rtnply by proportlonel representa'*i;-urn;;i;;.4oin 

thz slgnlf,rr;rrr of tfusi lnllucacc, lor qr?n\ L GnbrncGd bv the tlon rnrrl'8lr.
,,obracutte,,fo.tor.? creede-oi;.tnstc-bil-rccnt blrcL-wud An 14.ctt olrur calutltutbrrol bt t ln'-ihiiii11titcao"ctrdnplF-wbereth€rGb (thrt nry Glcct. blrct pcnon) tJr8n by ttoldtallh.cct'lon2?
r Stete fesbfature or i ctty councU or r ttFGc SGDcrc.og blrA relg -(thrt .msy Yc.. Glven tlrrt tlre SuDremc Court lrrs
corrntv commtsglon or r rchool board whlch erch clcct rbltr pctroor + gl w}gm.wtll bG lntcrpreted thc 15th Arnendment to requtre
aoca irot reflect raclsl ptlportloDr vlthln lnllueud rlrnlltcraW b, thc black com- e deraonrtratlon ol purpoaetul dbcrtmtnr-
thc relevtnt pepuleUou. thgt ,url&tlcUon EqDftyL tlon ln ordcr to clttblrlh r corutltuilonal
wtu bc wlnerrbla to prosccuuon under tcc- wtol d.a l, oforle wun uu pnopo'ttut-n vlolsuon" rnd dvrn thst thc votlrcS Rtghts
Uon Z. ft 13 vtrtudly tncoacelvr,blc thrt t-he thot'ot-la6a cbtbta ort ooru|llutlonttttl Ac1' tr picatcetca upon the lSth Amend-
.,[r snd ol ttrcf' hnsnagc stll not be ssttr8- l,trrnlld? - menL therc arc scrlour constltutlonal qucr-
rta b; oni oi-no"e--'obicciive'; iecton cx' rttt' lt tqin1 txc-'trrdlUoqtt gPEl!"^3! ;i;;;;il"d * to rhcther or not consresr
Htnsi"-;-esrly env Jurtsitctton tn the coun- the votlns Rtshtr Aci-+qud P?t-" 9_t* iii"cl.rd" r-"rn rErntrrp"et the pareuriters
G;H;-;rr"t"ncc- 6r trr""e taiton, tn con- electorrl proceer-+ ltr.hg"d !,lhl-9-911 ;6;-iid A-;nd-;[ by stmite statute.
iirii"tl." rrttn tne rbsencr o( Droporttontl sddtDl(o0lta"tilrrlghttog{ul_Pf1_ll?1 si111urr--corrutnit"nat qrie"Uoi. are ln.
lepiesenhtfort would represent .q euto- tton ln !.he clectonl D-mco.! do€. notP"ggl iof*a m-d!]"-afnieiiorts 6y the Congrces to
il1tc H;;iG evtaenani a sectloa t vlo-le- any.pollttcrl sroup. how-evcr tg$^ltgP "dfi6-.d 

overturn the supr€mc Court's

s 6652 @NGRESSIONAL RE@RD - SENATE June 9, 1982

nrp-a"i33. rna"eO naiv pouircar uientrsts Trernstsom, ;Thc odd Evolutlon oI the be able to say the same sbout mlne.

f"e'gf;'##'Ji"*; *EE t"ffik* *;x,r* t -*tEGfIq&F f.ifffi',ff"T#f#,llTi:,lf#YJ,*t 
'n 

aniitziitt 
rc wourd be no ruderer I stl:""*5,"f8fi*ITLffiffitr [,,]*'ac:i::ffi";fsfiffi#* t'

.l tven tl vou dld. thc
I r6g'rd;td ioievaiuruon other thrD itopor'I tend to ellov mtnorttlee tt
[i ;ffii}"il";'frtil; Trre nogon or loortns oble, bur le6 utu.!.tsU- t"rT6-tii;d; - 

wt1t tt uE lrc,tuor ql t'E odntnettutton

l, to the totdtty ol ctrcunstrncg trr meanln:- J6H;i-.rr;rtcLtry-Hdi-ttt bfd"di"tr ot tlu tatbt 2l'Ea,l
tl ft;-ilfih|;fi;otrcaelurerrtrtc- rribd,tt[sd;to-DiiArprirrunuponmi Ttrc rtulnlriratlor rnd the JuEttcc DG

ot-nrnd str,nded" anch.r tntrnt tt r r doatEi-i.cmrnrril rsiilpucauv-;cre' Em!g:ggU9:PS.=-::Pi5' ot-ntni stEnderq anch .! lntrnt lt r. norltJ.t rcndnxoe ry# 
"*.*ttY-:ffi 

ffiffi;i=ufffiffiH;ffifu-trgccuonideantiutear nouin ln tlrc cdrt aS ol a satcd. To thc cxteol tl
reaultorlentcd rtrDdr'd. Aftcr orcrlng dfi,;;d;rt, 6g"s roura tena-not to hcr|dsiln ra! lur cxrrcrrcd bL conc'la

thG cvldencc under trrc Drc!f,.at dro(Lld. rearn"G-proEtrirorr-r3dreacitruou-io: that-t-hcrsultrrtendrrdEstLtdtothGG&
thc court! rrf, ttrrc,rlvcs, -Doc g,b cvr- affirrrzc-lfiG-ty rutiittnr, tD- uob.a., tr.b!!!gart ol r.ctd cttot t ln th' clcctorrl
dcncc retre llr tntcrGncc ot htr'lir uta- ..ffii-oriiifao-'oit-n ri rn tndcpcra- qlggtG Ecr contcr'lac.' D.c.,trbcr 1r.

thc proporcd DG,r drndrrd. gtvrr trc rb Grii-ffiri:uu;ilt "tet- 
to iipracllteftoD.- 1081. Attornev Gcncral wtntrE r'lcttcb

EenDc ol pmpor6orrl reprc*rrteilm-lrd --'iffiTrl;;/d0rurr.lolroqaUtcotutttr.' Smlthr'ucxnlared&llerooaeaan'
thc Gxlstcncc or onc'. of,lJii;iict-,-. uia or .t;a,trtort t* grotcrlblnt al-brw Szrnnsilzc ttu rpet{os 2lrrtt ?

, trln. iactc <tf not en-trrcU-uttrUte) cerc liu m,,nlclgal cl,tr,ttoru? - - Tlre dcbctc ovrr rhcthcr or not to oY?F

been cctebltrhca fnerc fr no-ncci ior nrr- -Tlrc thnqq,t rould-bc Drolound. ry AoW" tura the guDrcmc gourt'! ilc.clcton l^ U&lll
tniirnqurrres uy ttrc court irr"re lc 

"o 
ultt- tJrc prehUtfr- !ou8-ht to drlte down- th9 v. Bolturt- snd cdrbUln r rcsult! t rt lor

;;;. tnr*n;ta-quegtton tor the court& entlrc lorn ol munlclprl Sovernnent ldopc' ldentllytns votlng dttrcrlntnetlon ln plrccol-"ffi;-n;rrtd tia b.,,ea1;* &-;r@iii iAa cd by thc .clty on tttg ryF. ol thc et lrmc thc Drescnt lnt€nt t rt" lr probrbly thc
gn;^j;i;-t"t{ - -' - lorm of clty councll clectlon .Tlrc Court shgle mo6t hrportrnt coistltutlonel lsflc
- 'Ctven 

tt e ats€nce ol proportlona,l repre. strted, "Despltc repeoted- ottrctr- .upon that wlll be conslderpd by the o?th Cort
seniatton 8nd the extstence of some .'obJec. Eultl-member (at lsrge) lqisfstlve-dlstrlct* gress. Involvcd tn thtrl eontroversy are fun-
[fre;;i""t"r, the effecttve burden ol prool the Court h8r conslst€ntly held that thev damentel lseucs lnvolvlng thc nature ol
io"fa- Ue uiron the defendant commuulty. arb not uncoDdltutlond." 1l Moblle vere Amertcan representstlve democracy, feder-
Ind""d. lt ts unclear what klnd ol cvldeDce, over-rule4 the at large electoral- stnrtture8 allsm, the dtvtston ol powera, end clvll
I a;1ylro"ta sulftce to overcome Buch evl- ol the morc than tsothlrds ol the 18,000+ ilght+ By-redeftntng the lotlor of. "clvll
ae"d.'n Mobilz, lor example, the a.bscnc. mnnlclpelltls ln tle country .thet -h-eve dghts" and "dtscrlmtnctlon" ln the context
of dtscrimtnatory purpose ana tfre exLt€trce adopted ihb lom ol Siovernment' would be ol vottng rtghta, the proposed "results"
oi Ggttt "rtc, irdn-Ctlscamlnatory reasona Dlaced ln serlous Jeoperdy. amondment would frsnsform the obJectlve

. ior tfie at large sysk; oI muniltpd clec- - What u&l bc thz lrnpact of tJu ttesldtt tzst of the Act lrom equal access to the ballot'
tions qras not-constaerja relevant tUamce upon reiltltt'tctlng ond reapp9rtlan neflt? box lnto equal resulta tn the electoral proc.

iv.Etn"" tni platntrrii or itCro*"r Federel Redlstrlctlng end respportlorylltIll"-ry ess. A resultr test lor dlscrlmlnatlon can

c6".ti. 
-- . - tlso wtU be ,udged on the basls ol prePoI' leed nowhero but to r stsnderd of prDpor---Fifi"g 

crslde thc abstratt pflnciplc lor thc ttonal representatlon analrsl1. As_ D:. W... F. tional representatlon by race,
momcn{ .rlhat tt the naior;biectiae o! those Glbson, the Presldent ol the toll-th C_ar_o^UnB (The followlng proceedtn's occ,rred

*'i"r,i::1,!?,9';i1i",;:!f::te-and 
szbsri' NAACil;"'"'il'jl3t,9'S,i?'ift"'i'"r:"3ffij g:,l|i rvri. rr^i&'. 1em.arr1s and are

Thc irnr,l.diltc purpose rs to ailow R dirccr ..rInress we see B reastrtcttni piliirtiitii ellJ:d at this polnt ln the Recono by

&s:.rlrtt, ui.on the mricyi[1' oi mrrri:i]rrlit.ies ttrc posstUttity ol blacks hn-vlng the prob- unnnlmousconsent:)
irr nro c.,.r'rtry s,hich hr.,le rrlontcrt rtlrrre nbiltiy of belng elected ln proportlon to this Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Presldent' lf
s1':rc':.: ol' o:..lions for cit]' corrncils and poprrlatlon, we wlll push hard,for t_new the Senator from Utah will yield, asg
s61111ry 1-r.rrrnls::icns. T|is rrii.s the t)reclse plan." Slmllarly, the Rcvcrend. Jcsse J-ack' CosDonsor Of the leglslatiOn, I am WOn.
Issrrc in liobile, as a matter of fact' Propo- son has stated. "Ble.ks ".,I?tt9-oli^11'lld dering whether weire going to haves

:ffif,J":[:Jti]lllfil'fft]:,']#5"X'"T 3:S3"']":i'f"ll"'"?"'*"'i"i]'Hf*liili:; g+l;i to speak to thG' r have been

I6es who would be more cepable of electrns Former Asslstrnt Attorney oi-""-.-"r i-iiiEiiil here -slnce 10:30 thts morning because
.,thelr,' representauver to offtce on r dtstrtct niiiits p.ew pays tras co;ceacd inri ^lnor- 

I took the word of the maloriiy leader

orwardvottngsystem. iiuoolt,theCourt riigrorptat*iwtll be lertiely lmmune to that we were going to becalllng thls

refused to dlsmanUe the at-targe Eunlclpsl pirtlsan or ldeological Serrymanderlng on legtslation up. I understand the major.
form of government 8dopted bv the cttv. the grounQg ol "vote.dllui-lon". lty's prerogatlve on thls matter' but I

"3:r*:;':r7:.1;tr 
o! oottns 

.dtsqtmtnotz ffj"Y;;$fi*iffi.ruor,,, rs one rher wiruti ttxe-to at least heve some tlmq

comptetely apart from the f8ct rhst st. has been respomtbre ror t liililr#1il"";ffi l-"Ilt walted 6 hours and l5 mlnuteq

larse vottns for muntctpel governnenta wes p.oursions oi ttrc vottng ;ffits ;;1 6;. to- be able to speak on thls lssue' Also'

lnstttuted by msny communtues tn the sectfon 6) trom tlrorc a*liiii,a 6-il;i; I.lnqutre whether lt ls the lntentlon ol

1910's and lg2o't tn responseE.unutuat tn- "q".t 
accesl by nlnorlttes to the reglstra- the actlng floor mBneger to move h

;ierrers ;i corruptton wttnn wera 8ys!em8 tton 8nd votlng processea lnto those de. have thls leeilslatlon before tbc
of government, ttrere ls sbsolutely no evl. slgllred to ensurs equal -electoral gutcoqe' Senate.
dirice that at lirse,votlns t€nds todlscrtmt' The rlght to reslst€r !"!,-"-f-$1!^""",1f: It ls now querter of 5. I have listened

, rid Ar-ih; M"bu. court-oxetrea, rhc dtsll, electorrl dererL, 8econ4 n.ggyry..* ;rfii;ie(:;t ;-ild;.-wa;As forraer
xlrri-e'ri;ur*ori;., --, ,= : i r.. ltlluctt lPlrtlol-!9f!8--P}gtg-,19l5 ;itil;d;;ilio'triinserf narobserve4

;l5.,m'f::H*fH:f ff'.fii*lff'lT lii"'3ll,i':*".l.*nd;S*LH.HS ::".1*:,;i{'li;-:::'::l*1ll*,1Dremrs€ ls aoopte'o ular oruv ora'cf,r ro rcP uuc uBue w re u E'rwuvs 
;; t!]; matter Of fACt, I have heard tt a good

iesent blacks- only whltes can repres€nt rtght ol raclel or gthalc groupr
rrbltes. snd only htspantcs can reprea€nt thelr 

-collcctlvc iote -dtlut€d':;-S;l.ei; mbny.tlDes. Iqm6uretheSenstorsltr

i..

I
l,I
t
8

I
t
t
t/
s

,&
I
rl

.vl
el
Ie
c
tt
m
8a
Se
hl
th
thr

I
trv
to
thz
6Pe
enc
Isr
one
has
hav
ton

I1
oilrt
ln3
nest
bec
tocel
Dem
rlsle
:;f r

,I\e t