Second Draft of Introductory Facts

    . .l . J.

9

INTRODUCTORY !'ACTS Second Draft

North Carolina has a population of 5,881,766. 22.4t of the

population is black. Px. 70A. It has 100 counties, of which 40

are covered by "5 of the voting Rights Act. The North carolina
General Assembly consists of the 120 member House of

Representatives and a 50 member Senate. Answer to IZA of

complaint. In 1967, North Carolina changed its method of

apportioning the members of its House in response to one person

one vote litigation. At that time, it amended the Constitution
of North Carolina, Article II "3(3) and "5(3) to prohibit the

division of counties in the formation of a legislative
district.I These provisions were not submitted for preclearance

pursuant to -5 until after this litigation was filed

In 1981, in response to the 1980 censusr North Carolina

reapportioned its legislature. The apportionment enacted used a

combination of multimember and single member districts, had a

population deviation of over 22* in each house, and had no

majority black districts. Stipulatj-ons L2 and 13, Stipulation
Ex. C & F.

On November 30, 198I, the Attorney General of the United

States objected to the whole county provisions of the North

Carolina Constitution, finding that the use of whole counties in

IPrior to that time, each county got one representative in
the House, and the remaining twenty members $rere apportioned to
the largest counties. The provisions with regard to the Senate
specifically provided that counties entitled to more than one
Senator might be divided.

t-



Iegislative districting required the use of Iarge multimember

districts and that this "necessariry submerges. cognizable

minority population concentration into large white electorates."
stipulation 22, stipuration X I{. The Attorney Generar arso

objected to the apportionment of both the House and the Senate.

Stipulation 23, and 25, Stipulation X N and O. Each body was

redistricted two more times before the redistrictings were

precleared. The version in effect at the time of the trial in
this action, Chapters I and 2 of the North Carolina Session Lahrs

of the second Extra session of L982, created two senate seats

and five House seats which hrere majority black in population or

voter registration. A11 were in areas covere<l by -5. The

Senate districting divided eight counties covered by -5 and four
counties not covered by -5. The House plan divided eleven

counties covered by "5 and fifteen counties not covered by -5.

Tp. 27-3L and Px. 2(a) and 3(a).

At the trial of this action, plaint.iffs challenged five
miltimember House districts, one multimember Senate district,
and 1 single member Senate district which fractured a minority
community.

-2



A. STATEWIDE HISTORY OF DISCRIT,IINATION
AND BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATION

North Carolina has a long and bitter history of barriers to

effective participation by black citizens in the poritical
process. In 1900, white democrats used an overtly racist "white
supremacy" propaganda campaign, violent intimidation, and

corruption in voting, to accomplish adoption a poll tax and a

literacy test with a grandfather clause designed to limit its
disfranchising effects to blacks. From then until 1950, black

voter registration and office holding virtually disappeared. T.

232-243.

The literacy test rras used until at least 1970. Stips. 85,

Dx. 4Lr 42, T.578. As a result, by 1948, only I5t of eligible
blacks Inlere registered to vote, and in 1960, only 39.1* of

blacks of voting age were registered compared to 92.Lt of
whites. T. 242t X. 38. Although by 197I, the gap had narrowed

somewhat (44.4* of blacks registered compared to G0.6t of
whites), the gap has not narrowed significantly since then, and

even appellants' witnesses conceded that the gap between black

and white voter registration remained unacceptably high at the

time of trial. Px. 40, T. 575-577, 1357.

The literacy test and poll tax were not the only means used

in North Carolina to limit black political participation. In

I9 55 r dn anti-single shot voting law hras enacted which bras

enforced in specified counties and municipalities until it was

declared unconstitutional in L972. Stip. 9L, Answer to
Interrogatory *20. In addition, concurrent with the adoption of

the multi-member district plan for apportioning the General
1-



Assembly in L967, a system of numbered seats was adopted. The

avowed purpose for adopting numbered seats was to prevent single
shot votingr and they were adopted over the objection of black

leaders that their purpose was to dilute Negro voting strength.

The numbered seat provisions hrere used until decrared
unconstitutional in L972. Stip. 92, T. 302-304, Answer to
Interrogatory *2L.

North Carolina continues to use a majority vote requirement

which applies to aIt primary elections . I N. C. G. S. -163-ll
(Stips. 88-89) The majority vote requirement makes it less
likely that a minority grouprs candidate will win an election
because the majority group will be able to elect its candidate

in the run-off. T. 141.

In at least two recent, welI publicized, €Iections for
Congress and for Lt. Governor, the black candidate who led in
the primary lost in the run-off election provided for by the

majority vote requirement. T. 963, 965. The majority vote

reguirement also diminishes the ability of black candidates to
be elected to local offices. T. 967, 619, 958-959. This

electoral defeat at higher and lower offices impedes the ability
of the black electorate to elect candidates to the General

Assembly by providing a disincentive to running for potential

minority candidates, by preventing the development of a pool of

1I., multiseat elections to win, a primary candidate must
receive a vote total greater than the total number of votes cast
divided by the number of seats in question, and then divided by
two.

2-



lr

brack elected officials who can assist blacks just getting
started in poritics, and by preventing the development of a poor

of experienced and credible elected officials at lower levels
who are available to run for higher offices. T. r42r 437, 960,

967i Dx. 48, p. 22.

starting in 1898, and continuing to the present, politicians
in North carolina have used raciar appeals in campaigns against

bLack candidates and candidates sympathetic to the brack
community. The themes have been consistent: the threat of
black bloc vote, craims that he opponent favors integration, and

threats that the opponent will be controlled by to black voters
or politicians. Thus, in 1898, the Democrats ran an ad showing

then Governor Russell pictured with a prominent black political
reader. T. 237-8, Px. 22 and 23. rn 1980r Dow u.s. senator

John East, used flyers showing his opponent with black leaders.

T. 357-358. In 1983, Senator Jesse HeIms ran nehrspaper

advertisements showing his senatorial opponent tarking with a

black politi-caI leader. T. 38I-389, px. 53 (c ) .

In 1954, Senator Alton Lennan accused his challenger of
having the support of the black vote, T. 247. In L976, this
type of racial appeal was used with apparent success by the

white candidate in the run-off primary against a black candidate

for the office of Lt. Governor. T. 334-38, 390-91, x 44. The

same technique vras used in the I982 congressional election in
the 'run-off primary between now Congressman Tim Valentine and

his black opponent Micky Michaux. T. 357-369i Px. 52.

3-



rn addition, campaign propaganda accusing the opponent of
being soft on race issues or in favor of integration have been

common from wilris smith's "white people wake up', leaflet in
1950, T. 245-246, px. 25, through the I950's (f. 247,24g, px.

26) and the 1960's (f. 257, 269, 270, 272, px. 26, 27,33-36).
They were used by Senator Jesse Helms in his initial election in
L972, accusing his opponent of being in favor of busing for
school integration (r. 274_276, px. 37(a), and in his recent
re-election, accusing his opponent of being in favor of black
voter registration. px. 53(c).

As a result of disfranchisement, it " majority vote
requirement and the use of raciar appeals, there has been only
very recent and limited black electoral success in North
carolina. prior to 194gr Do bracks were elected to pubric
office. rn the early 1950's, a few blacks hrere erected to
various city councils. After the civir rights movement
escalated in the late I950,s, these black politicians lost
support of white voters and the trend did not continue. T.
262-263.

By 1970, there were only 62 black elected officials in North
Carolina- T. 284 The first black member of the State House of
Representatives vras not elected untir 1969, and the first black
State Senator hras not elected until in L974. The number of
brack elected officials increased to just over 2oo by 1925.

Since 1975, the growth has almost stopped (f. 2g4-5i X.4I). In
L982, blacks h,ere still only 7.3t of alr county commissioners.

4-



At no time prior to this litigation was more than 48 of the

state senate brack; nor was more than 3.3t the House black.
stip. #96. rn the districts in question, considering all
elections for the General Assembly since 1970, black Democrats

who survived the primary have been three times as likely to lose

in the generar erection as were their white Democratic
counterparts. px . Lg.2

No black person has been elected to statewide office or to
the United States Congress from North Carolina this century with
the except of three judges who were elected in 1978 and 1982 to
seats to which they had previously been be appointed. Stip.
100.

North Carolina also has along history of official action
designed to create and maintain segregation by race in all areas

of Iife. Between 1900 and 1950, segregation was virtually
total. T. 24O, 243. Most of segregatory statutes were not

repealed until after 1965, many as late as 1973 (px. 42).

Prior to the decision of Brown v. Board, North Carolinats
public schools hrere separate and unequal; schools for black

students received substantially Iess funding than schools for
whites. Schools remained essentially segregated and black
schools continued to be inferior until integration hras required

by federal court orders after the decision in Swann v.

2tn this regard, the Court is not presented witht he fact
situation present in Whitcome \/. CJB\rfE, _ US (I97 ).
rn the diitricts in @enGFats aFvirtuffry
always successful. The fate of black democrats, even those who
survive the primary, is more problemat-ic. T. 84

E



Itlecklenburg County Board of Education, U. S. ( r971) .

T. 267, 611, 701. Thus, armost all brack adults educated in
North Carolina who are over 30 years old attended inferior
segregated schoors for arr or most of their education.

Residentiar segregation, established by zoning laws and

other ordinances was maintained by such policies as the Veterans

Administration and Federal Housing Administration race based

restrictions. Residential segregation was perpetuated by the
location of public housing and the relocation of black residents
displaced by urban renewal. T . 243, 265-266, 649, 609-612, 7?5.

The degree of residentiar segregation remains almost totar. T.

268, 436, 596, 648, 703 | 739 , 840-1 , L2IG-18. See also px.

3a-8a.

Until the mid-1960's there was almost no employment

integration, including by state government. Even the state
Employment security commission referred peopre to prospecti-ve

jobs on the basis of their race. T. 263-264.

According to witnesses for both apperlants and apperlees,

black continue to bear the effects of past and current
discrimination in employment. T. 6II, 703-704, 743, l2I6-l2LB;
126I, Houser dep. at 38-39. Even in state government, blacks

remain concentrated in lower paying jobs. Stip. 69, 71, ']-2 and

P. Ex. 71.

Blacks are poorer, Iess well educated, more poorly housed,

less healthy and less likely to have access to transportation.
For every, socio-economic measure reviewed, for the whole state
and for each county in guestion, the socio- economic status of

6-



bracks is rower than the socio-economic status of whites. T.
402, 411, X 56-70A, Stips. 63-84

These facts 1ed the District Court to find that the 1ower

socio-economic status of black citizens lessens their ability to
participate effectively in the poritical process, T. 402-403,

801, and contributes to the inequality of their opportunity to
elect representatives of their choice.

This statewide legacy of a history of discrimination
provides the background for the discription which follows of
each of the specific legisrative districts in question.

7-



:i'f :

B. MECKLENBURG coUNTY (Second oraft)
House District #36 consisted solely of Mecklenburg county.

(Population 404,270) (px. 57). This eight member district was

the largest house district in the state. (fp. _) At the time
of trial, 26.5* of its residents h,ere b1ack, 24.ot of its voting
age population was b1ack, and I8.08 of its regj-stered voters
were brack. stipurations s7 and 59. rn r9go, 43.gt of the
black voti-ng age population was registered to vote compared to
68.1t of the white voting age popuration, a difference of 25*.
The composition of House District #36 has not changed since
1965. Stips 115 and 116.

senate District #22 conslsted of arl of Mecklenburg
plus all of cabarrus county. The population of the
district is . Senate District *22 is 24.3*
in popuration, and rG.Bt of its registered voters are black.
This four member district was the largest senate district.

The electoral success rate of btack candidates running from
these two districts has been dismal. The first black
representative elected from House District #36 this century was

not erected until after this litigation was filedr drthough
seven black candidates ran between 1966 and l9gr. (stips.
and 115) rn L982, after this litigation hras fi}ed, two brack
candidates ran for the eight seats. One rr,on; one lost. The one

who lost was the only Democrat who lost in the Lgg2 House

election in Mecklenburg County.

SD *22 has not changed in composition at least since 197I.
Stip. 117. The first black candidate to be elected from SD *Zz

County

enti re

black

1-



this century ran and lost in L972, and then h,as successful in
L974, 1976 and L978. fn 1980, the black candidate lost the

primary. In 1982, the black candidate hras the only Democrat who

lost in the general election for the Senate.

Thus out of the twelve legi-slators from this area, whi-ch is
a quarter black in population, one was black in 1978, they were

all white in 1980, and one hras black in L982.

This inability to elect black candidates is caused by the

handicap to effective participation which is legacy of past and

current racial discrimination and segregation and by the
unwillingness of white voters to vote for black candidates.

In the period betwee.n 1930 and 1950, a City of Charlotte
zoning ordinance restricted blacks to certain sections of town.

(r. 243) In the 1980's, Mecklenburg Countyrs neighborhoods,

churches, and social clubs remain racially segregated. (Tp.

436i Px. 4A) Blacks currently bear the effects of past
discrimination in education, employment, and health. BIack

residents of Mecklenburg county are five times as like1y to be

living below poverty leveI as are whites (25.7t v. 5.5t), and

the black mean income is onry 57* of the white mean income.

(pX. 56) Blacks are five times as likely to be Iiving in a

residence with no vehicle available (26.5t v. 5.0t) (px. 56),

and fetal death, neonatal death and post neonatal death rates

are twice as high for blacks as for whites. (Stipulation 741

Schools in Mecklenburg County remained racially segregated until
required by this Court to desegregate in Swann v. Charlotte

Mecklenburg Board of Education,

2-
U. S. (I971), which



means that students who have been educated in integrated schools

are just beginning to be ord enough to vote. Two and one-half
(2-r/2) times as many bracks as whites have only an eighth grade

education or less (25.0t v. 9.9t), (px. 56). Stipulation 79.

The North Carolina literacy test $ras used in ltecklenburg County

at least as recently as 1968 (Tp. 429). In 1970, only 40t of
the bLack voting age population was registered to vote.

These statistics are not abstract numbers but are the
foundation of the black community's difficulty in participating
effectively in the political process.

Although Mecklenburg county no longer uses a literacy test,
the memory and fear of that test prevents many blacks from

registering to vote, especially Mecklenburg county's many bracks

who are illiterate. (Tp. 4GI) Because there is no tradition of
participation in the electoral process in the black community,

it is difficult to turnout black voters on election day. (Tp.

432) This is particularly true of recently registered voters.
(rp. 477 )

It costs over twice as much to run a campaign for an

at-Iarge seat as a single member district seat in Mecklenburg

County (Tp. 79L, 130; Px. 20), and the difficulty of raising
money is one of the primary barriers to black candidates. (fp.
437, 443) The low income level of the black community means

that, although as high a percentage of bracks as of whites make

cont'ributions, the amount which blacks contribute to black

candidates is much lower than the amount which whites contribute
to white candidates. This problem is further exacerbated by the

3-



:, t

low percentage of whites who contribute to black candidates and

by the fact that when whites do contribute to black candidates,
they contribute less than they contribute to white candidates.
(rp.79L-794)

The residential and social segregation Iimits the exposure

of black candidates to the white community (Tp. 436), and the
difficulty which brack candidates have in getting support from

white politicians poses an additionar probrem for brack
candi{ates who must gain white support in order to win. (Tp.

441 )

Because of poritical inexperience, poverty, and social and

residential segregation, blacks in these two districts enter the
erection process with an unequal ability to participate. To

this handicap is added the limited willingness of white voters
to vote for black candidates. on the averdg€, only 36t of white
voters voted for the black candidate in primaries in these thro

districts, and only 35t voted for the black candidate in general

elections. Since whites are over 8Ot of the registered voters,
this presents a substantial hurdle for the black community in
electing representatives of its choice. Even the successful
black candidate elected to the Senate in 1978 ranked last of all
candldates among white voters in the primary, and whites
commonly rank black candidates last or next to last in both

primaries and generaJ- elections.

Blacks are able to overcome this unwillingness of whites to
vote for black candidates only by single shot or concentrated

voting. (Tp. 85, L437) By giving up their right to vote for a

4-



!' ,". ,

fuI1 srate, bracks can sometimes overcome the effects of
racially porarized voting. Even with sharpry increased
concentration of voting by blacks in L992, however, only one of
two black candidates was successful in the general election for
the House and the black candidate for the senate h,as

unsuccessful. The one black candidate who $ron $ras successful
only because of the unusually low white and Republican turnout
in L982. (Tp. L44 )

Arthough blacks have enjoyed some limited success in at
large elections in the city of charlotte, which is 3lt black in
popuration, the addition of the more rural parts of the county

to ttre House district and of cabarrus county to the senate

district makes it even more difficult for bracks to campaign

effectively or to be elected in the legislative districts than

in the city elections. (Tp. 445)

Dividing House District #36 into eight singre member

districts resurts in the creation of two districts with an

effecti-ve black voting majority. stip. lI0 Dividing senate

District *22 into four single member districts results in the

creation of one district with an effective black voting
majority. Stip. LL2

5-



','.1 +

C. DURHAM COUNTY (Second Draft)
House District #23 consisted of aII of Durham County and was

allotted three members. The district, formerly #rG, did not

change from the 1971 apportionment. N.c.G.s. -r2o-2 (l9gl
Replacement). Durham County has 152r785 resj-dents of whom 36.3t
are black. 33.6t of the voting age population is black. (px.

58) At the time of trial, 28.5t of the registered voters were

black. St,ip . 57

Voter registration of blacks residents of Durham County has

consistently lagged behind registration of whites of voting age.

rn 1978, 39.4t of blacks r^,ere registered compared to G3.0t of
whites; by 1980, 45.88 of blacks were registered compared to
70.78 of whites; and by October, 1982, the gap was stitl
substantial with 66.0t of white adults registered compared to

52.9t of blacks. JS app. 24a, Int. #I, px 85.

This disparity results in part from past intentional
disfranchisement which its legacy of mispreception and fear of
registration in the black community. The disparity has been

maintained by the lack of accesibility of voter registration and

the extreme lack of cooperation of the Durham County Board of
Elections. This Board is, despite the protest of Durhamrs black

Democrats, all white. (Tp. 655-662, 555) rt has hampered brack

voter registration, for example, by consistently refusing to
allow precinct registrars to register voters outside of the

registrarrs home; and it did not allow them to register out of

their precincts until the State Board of Elections intervened in
1982. (Tp. 657, 553-555)

I.



Additionally, current segregation, poverty and

discrimination hinder efforts by blacks towards effective
participation in the politicar process. Durham county has

residentially segregation, T. 649'-650, which has been

perpetuated, in part, by the Iocation of public housing
projects, which are armost excrusively black in population, in
the black areas of the city. rn the mid r970's, the effort to

disperse new public housing projects met with massive resistance

from the white residents of the surrounding areas. (f. 649-650)

One of the results of the residential segregation is that
the school system in Durham county are, by and large,
segregated. The Durham City school district is almost 90t black

in student enrollment. whites tend to move into the county

school district, which is 7Ot white in student population. T.

647 -648

Churches, country clubs, social clubs and civic clubs all
remain essentially segregated, T. 648, blacks tend to be

employed in rower paying jobs and employment discrimination
continues to be a problem. T. 651 24.9t of blacksr ES compared

to 7.6t of whites, Iive below the poverty 1evel, and 25.Zt of
bracksr BS opposed to 6.98 of whites living in housing units
with no vehicle available. Px. 58 The lack of transportation

makes it more difficult for blacks to register and to vote. Tp.

685 26.6t of blacks versus 14.6t of whites have an eighth grade

education or less. Px. 58 Infant mortality rates for blacks

are two to three times as high as they are for whites. Stip.
74.

2-



The segregation prevents bracks from having exposure to
white voters. The row education revel and poverty prevent
blacks from having the means to participate in the political
process effectively. This is particularly true in county wide

elections which are expensive and time consuming. Tp. 6G5

The handicap that black voters and citizens start with is
exacerbated by the use of racial appeals in election campaigns

in Durham County. Racial appeals have historically been used in
statel^ride elections, as discussed on p. _, supfa, and also in
local elections. T. 249 These racist appeals have continued to
the present. In the L9g2 Congressional racer Dow Congressman

varentj.ne faced black candidate Mickey Michaux in a run-off
primary. varentine mailed retters to his white voters urging
them to counter his opponentts "wer1 organized block Isic] vote,r

who l,lichaux would be "bussing . .. to the porling praces.',
(Emphasis in the original) px. 52, pt. 3 Another letter mailed
to white precincts in Durham listed the vote for Michaux and

Varentine in brack precincts and stated, "rf you object to this
domination if you are resentfur of having others elect your

officials then you should vote on JuIy 27." px. 52, pt. 2;

Tp.

These ads forlowed on the heers of ads taughting an alr
white slate for the Durham City Council in 19gI (f. 354; px.

5I). They preceded ads which ran in the Durham Morninq Herald,

in support of senator Jesse Helms, which associated Helms'

opponent, Governor James ,Hunt, with black teachers on strike in

3-



another state and accused Hunt of spending state money to
register blacks to vote. px 53

Despite these odds, black candidate Mickey Michaux was

elected to the House from Durham from 1973 to 1979, and black
candidate Kenneth Spaulding was elected in 1978, 1980 and tgg2.
these elections vrere not, however, the resurt of white support
for the black candidates. They hrere the result of careful
screening of candidates by the black community and of extreme

single shot voting

The president of the Durham County Committee on the Affairs
of Brack peopre testified that his organization limits
recruitment of candidates to those who can appeal to the white
community. Thus blacks, as opposed to whites, must be

businessmen or lawyers and must start with high name

recognition. T. 565-666. rn addition, the candidate must not

have been outspoken in support of the needs of the black
community. T. 667

Even with this limitation, the black candidate who $ras the

choice of the black community received a very 1ow level of white
support in the primaries. rt is important to focus on the
primary since Durham County is overwhelmingly Democrat in voter
regi-stration (79t), stipuration x KK and wj-nning the primary is
t,antamont to winning the erection. Tp. 98-99 rn his inltlal
election ln 1978, Spaulding received votes from only IGt of
white voters. He hron that year because of the extraordinary

concentration of voting by black voters who gave 99t of their
votes to the black candidates. rn 1980, there was no opposition

4-



to any of the three incumbents and so there was no primary.r
In L982, in the primary, there h,ere only two white candidates

for three seats. Even in those circumstances only 37t of whites

voted for the black incumbent, the clear choice of the black

community.

Thus, while Durhamts blacks have., to some degree, overcome

the handicaps to their effective participation in the political
process, .they have done so only by paying the price of severely

limiting candidates to those acceptable to the white community

and by giving up the right which white voters have of voting for
a full slate of candidates.

If Durham County were divided into single member districts,
one of the three districts would have an effective black voting
majority. Srip. I44.

lfhe Solicitor General asserts that the lack of opposition
shows white support for the black candidate. There is nothing
in the record to support this assertion.

5-



D. FORSYTH COUNTY (Second Draft)
House District #39 consists of all of Forsyth County, except

Salems Chapel and Bellows Creek Townships, and is apportioned

five members. (px. 5(a), Tp. 42) From 1971 to 1981, all
Forsyth County hras included in House District *29. N.C.G.S.

"120-2 ( 1981 Supplement ) . The total population of Forsyth

County is 243t683i 24.4t of the population is b1ack. House

District #39 has 9358 fewer people;25.It of its population is
black. (Stip. X BB and Stip.57).

Blacks in Forsyth County live with the legacies of
segregation and discrimination. (Houser dep. at 35) Black

residences are concentrated in the east side of the city of

Winston-Salem. (px. 5(a), T. 595) This residential segregation

has been reinforced by the City which has located all public

housing for families, which is over 95t black in population, in
the black section of town and which has had a practice of
relocating black people displaced by urban renewal and community

development projects back into the black community. (f. 511)

This residential segregation is complemented by churches and

social clubs which are segregated and country clubs which are

all white. (r. 595-596)

In this black community are located a disproportional number

of substandard houses, unemployed people, and people not

receiving adequate health care. (t. 5951 25.6t of black people

in Forsyth County live below poverty as compared to 6.9t of

whites; the black mean income is only 59.6t of the white mean

income. (px. 57) Although the major corporations employ

1-



blacks, they tend to be confined to lower eschelon jobs, (T.

611 ). The lack of financial resources hinders black
participation in the electoral process, especially in the more

expensive at-Iarge elections. (Houser dep. at 35)

27.4t of black in Forsyth have no vehicle available to them,

compared to 5.9t of whites, Px. 57, and this lack of
transportation is an impediment to blacks in getting to the

polls to vote. (r. 634)

Schools in Forsyth County were integrated in I970 as a

result of litigation. (Houser dep. at 38; Tp. 611) Most blacks

of voting age attended segregated schools. Over a quarter of

Forsythrs black adult have only an eighth grade education or

less. (Px. 57) Thus blacks in Forsyth Countyr Ers elsewhere in

the state, enter the political process with a substantial

handicap.

Forsyth County, unlj-ke Durham County, is a two-party county.

In this county, while black candidates survive the Democratic

primaries they tend to lose in the general elections because

Republicans cross over and vote for white Democrats but not for
black Democrats. (f. 87)

Thus in 1978 and I980, every black Democrat running for
public office was defeated although both white Democrats and

white Republicans were elected. Not only the delegation to the

General Assembly, but also the Board of County Commissioners and

the Board of Educations were all white. (T. 6L3-6221 For both

I978 and 1980, black incumbents appointed mid-term were

2-



up there right to voLe for a full
elect a black candidate. (Tp.

any chance to

In the general

elections of 1978 and 1980, black voters gave the black
candidate only 34t and 24* of their votes respectively, and the
black candidates lost. In L982, when black Democrats were

successful, black voters gave the black candidates 55t of their
vote.

The other factor at pray in L9B2 was this ritigation. rn

L982, white Democrats for the first time helped black candidates
get exposure in the white community because they were concerned

about the threat of having to go to singre member districts.
Houser dep. at 49

rn short, 1982 was aberationar because of the pendency of
this litigation, because white Democratic incumbents did not

run, because white turnout was unusually 1ow, because

Republicans, who tend to beat blacks but not white Democrats,

did unusually poorry, and because black voters gave up their
right to vote for a full slate of candidates.

At rarge erections in Forsyth county pose an additional
probrem for bracks in electing candidates of their choice.

Black leaders who have been outspoken about issues of concern to
the black community cannot get white support and therefore
cannot win at-large elections. (t. 625-6261 Even appellantsl
witness, Representative Houser, conceded that if you are a brack

in Forsyth County and want to get electedr you "have to keep

your mouth shut." (Houser dep. at 42-431 Thus in recruiting
candidates for at-large elections, the blac'k community must look

slate, to have

, t437).

4-



Democratic candidates for the State House. Each year less than

a third of white voters voted for these candidates in the

general election, and, although over 95t of black voters voted

for them, they rrrere defeated because each was ranked last of all

candidates by white voters. In 1978 and in 1980, the black

Democrat was the only Democratic candidate to be defeated by a

Republican. Px. 15(b) and 15(d)

In L982, after this litigation was filed, two black

candidates were elected to the State House. This success is not

likely to repeat itself (Tp. 871 and does not indicate that

black citizen's have an opportunity equal as whj-tes to elect

candidates of their choice to the House of Representatives.

There are many reasons that L982 was "aberational" in

Forsyth County. In the L982 Democratic primary, there erere an

unusually large number of white candidates with no white

incumbents running. Thus, it was not that a increased percent

of white voters voted for black candidates, but that the white

vote was unusually broadly spread among candidates, that allowed

two blacks to emerge from the primary. (Tp. 89-90)

In the general election in 1982, Democrats running for all

offices did unusually well. (Houser dep. at 45) Although the

black candidates were ranked last and next to last among white

voters, they won only because white turnout $ras unusually low,

2Ot less than it had been in 1980. (Tp. 89-90)

Two additional factors were at play in 1982. One was an

extreme increase in single shot voting by blacks. In House

District #39 as elsewhere, blacks must single shot vote, giving

3-



.r ,, .: 'o

for a "lightweight" (T. 625-626)

If HD #39 is divided into single member districtst, one

district over 65t black in popuration or two majority black

districts can be formed. (Stipulation L2g) In fact, the remedy

proposed by appellants and accepted by the District Court for HD

#39 created two single member districts in which a rnajority of

registered voters is black.1

IThus the
have a .reduced
than with at
erroneous.

Solicitor Generalrs
number of delegates
Iarge elections,

statements that blacks would
with single member districts
SG brf at 22, is clearly

5-



E. WAKE COUNTY (Second Draft)

House District #2I had six members apportioned to it and

consisted of Wake County. This district, formerly #15, was the

same in I971. N.C.G.S -120-2 (198f replacement). Of Wake

County's 3OL1327 residents (Px. 59), 2L.8t are black and 20.5$

of the voting age population is black. In 1980, only I3.7t of

the registered voters were black. Stipulation 59. In 1980,

42.3t of the black voting age population h,as registered to vote

compared to 68.3t of the white voting age population. Stip. 58.

No black person had been elected to the North Carolina House

of Representatives from Wake County this century until Dan BIue

was elected in 1980. Stips.95,97. BIue ran in 1978 but was

defeated in the primary. BIue got votes from only 21t of white

voters in 1978. In 1982, when BIue ran as an incumbent, over

60t of white voters still did not vote for him in the primary.

This number is important since Wake County is overwhelmingly

Democratic, and success in the primary is tantamount to election
(t. 582; Answer to Interrogatory #1).

A large degree of single shot voting was necessary to enable

Blue to win in 1980 (Tp. 85, L437), when he got votes from 31t

of white voters. Eight-one percent (81t) of black voters voted

for BIue giving him 50t of their total votes. That is, black

voters voted for an average of only two candidates although

there were six slots to fill. While black voters ranked Blue

first j-n 1980, white voters ranked Blue eighth out of nine

candidates.

1-



BIuers incumbency ameliorated the racially polarized voting

to some extent, but the high percentage of white voters who did

not vote for Blue as a non-incumbent in primaries ( 74t ) makes

the election of a different black candidate problematic. (Tp.

102 ) The large percentage of whites who did not vote for
non-incumbent blacks presents an especially large hurdle since

only Is.It of the registered voters is black. Stip.57.

IO L982, when BIue was re-elected r Errl incumbent black

district court judge suffered a defeat that was the result, dt

least in part, of her race. (Tp. L22L) Although John Baker, a

black all-pro football player who was well known in the white

community (Tp. L220) was elected Sheriff of Wake County, he

received only 50.8t of the votes in the general election (Stip.

167 ) in a county which is 78t Democratic (Answer to

Interrogatory #I) and normally votes along party lines. (f.

582) Appellants' expert, who analyzed only Bakerrs election as

an incumbent, conceded that even Bakerrs re-election was marked

by statistically significant racially polarized voting. (Tp.

L42s)

The black serving on the Raleigh City Council and the Wake

County Board of Education srere both elected from majority black

districts. (Stip. *_) fne only black ever to serve on the

County Commission lives in an affluent white neighborhood. (Tp.

L22L)

The chance of blacks being able to participate in the

political process effectively enough to elect candidates of

their choice is diminished further by segregation,

2-



discrimination, poverty, and the lingering effects of past

discrimination in registration and voting. In 1970 , 37.2* of

blacks of voting age were registered to vote compared to 63.7t

of whites. Stip. 58. By 1982, 41.9t of voting age blacks,

compared to 71.3t of voting age whites, $rere registered to vote.

(Tp. 531-572 )

Wake County's.bIack population is poorer than its white

population (Tp. LZL6) with the black mean income only 57t of the

white mean income and with four times as many blacks as whites

Iiving below poverty (23.4t v. 6.2t). (Px. 59). This poverty

impacts the ability of blacks to participate in the political

process even more in multi-seat elections than in single member

district elections since at-Iarge campaigns are considerably

more expensive in Wake County than are single member district

campaigns. (Px. 20i Tp. 130).

Wake County is residentially and socially segregated. (Tp.

L2L6) fhe housing segregation is the result of past racial

discrimination and, even recently, the PubIic Housing Authority

has faced racially motivated opposition to placing public

housing in white neighborhoods. (Tp. L2L7-1218) Wake County

schools was integrated only as the result of litigationr (fp.

l.2]-6l, and over three times as many blacks as whites have an

eighth grade education or less (28.2t v. 9.3t). (px. 59)

The unwillingness of a substantial number of whites to vote

for black non-incumbents in primaries, the very low proportion

of voters that is b1ack, and socio-economic handicaps of blacks

combine to prevent black resi.dents of Wake County from having a

3-



' I t' t 
'

. I .r" a

equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice in an

at-large election system.

Wake County can be divided into six single member districts
of which one will have an effective brack voting majority.
(Stip. I58).

4-



Ea HOUSE DISTRICT #8 (Second Draft )

House District #8 consisted of Wilson, Edgecomb and Nash

counties and h,as alloted four members. wilson county has a

population of 63,L22 (36.4t black), Edgecomb County has a

population of 55,988 (50.8t black), and Nash County has a

population of 57,153 (32.9t black). The district as a whole is
39.5t black in population, but only 29.5t black in voter
registration. This district (formerly numbered House District
*7) did not change from the I97l apportionment. (Stip. I75)

The legacy of racial segregation and discrimination is
readily apparent in House District #8. Each county remains

essentially segregated by race. B1acks live on the east side of

the railroad track that divides the City of Wilson in Wilson

County (t. 703) and on the east side of that same railroad track
in Rocky Mount, the city that is divided between Nash and

Edgecomb Counties. (f. 744) Both areas continue to have all
white country clubs, and churches, social organizations and

civic clubs remain segregated. (f. 702, 742)

The schools in Wilson ri,ere integrated in L972 by federal

government mandate. The public schools of Rocky Mount are 758

black in the elementary grades; they are supplemented by six all
white private schools. In 1983, the Rocky Mount Board of
Education adopted a pupil classroom assignment plan based .in

race that resulted in some alI black classrooms. (f. 701,

7 40-7 4L)

While large businesses have integrated workforces, black

employees are concentrated in the lower paying jobs, and many
1-



blacks are emproyed in minimum wage jobs in the tobacco
industry. (703-4, 743)

An extraordinarily high level of the black popul.ation lives
below poverty lever in these counties: 37.8t in wirson county,

30.5t in Edgecomb county; 41.8t in Nash county. rn each of
these counties, the comparabre figure for whites is berow lot.

Efforts of the black community to eradicate the effects of
past intentional disfranchisement has met considerable
resistence in this district. T. 704-7LLi 745-746. The black

voting age population registered to vote in these counties is as

follows ( Stip. 58 ) :

1970 1 980

Wilson

Edgecomb

Nash

White

66.2

75.4

48.2

BIack

36.3

45.0

18.4

White

64.4

BIack

40.0

40.7

21. 3

WiIson

Edgecomb 67.3

Nash 58.1

In Wilson County, voter registration was Iimited to the

County Courthouse until 1978 (f. 704, 707)r in Edgecomb County

registration was Iimited to the county election office in Tarbor

and Rocky Mount until the mid-70 ' s. (f . 7 45-7 46 ) ftris hras a

particular problem for blacks in these counties since they have

limited access to transportation. ( f . 705 , 7 45') Between 25t

and 30t of black families lacked access to a vehicle in 1980.

(pex. 50, 6L, 62). The limitation on the place of registration
was also a problem because of the limited hours these facilities
hrere open and because of the persistent fear of the Courthouse

and of the process held by older blacks. (f. 706, 74L) Neither

2-



county allowed registrars to register people out of their
precincts, thus preventing them from conducting registration
dri-ves, until the State Board of Elections intervened in I982.
(f. 525,708) The barriers imposed by the Boards of Election to
opening up the election process have prolonged the effects of
past intentional disfranchisement.

To these handicaps is added the persistent use of racial
appeals in campaigns up to the time of trial px. 52 (part A) and

,px. 53(J), and a remarkable unwillingness of white voters to
vote for black candidates. Even appellantsr orrrn expert witoess

conceded that racially polarized voting in this district was so

severe that that factor alone'wi11 prevent black candidates from

being elected Tpp. L452-54, and Dr. Grofman testifed that,
"Racially porarization in so extreme that...no brack has any

chance of winning in that district as it is presently
constituted. " Tp. 103-104

As a result of the combination of these factors r no black
person has ever been elected to the North Carolina General

Assembly from this district, (Stips. 95, L75), and election of
black candidates to countywide office in any of the three
counties has been so minimar as to be negligabre. (stips. L76,

L77, L92, Tp. 7L3-7L41

In this district, blacks not only lack equal opportpnity to
elect representatives of their choice, they lack any opportunity

at all to elect representatives of their choice.

3-