Second Draft of Introductory Facts
Working File
January 1, 1985

Cite this item
-
Case Files, Thornburg v. Gingles Working Files - Guinier. Second Draft of Introductory Facts, 1985. 2a1dd277-db92-ee11-be37-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/f39388a8-8a13-41ec-a0e5-b846eaf27715/second-draft-of-introductory-facts. Accessed July 07, 2025.
Copied!
. .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-