More specifically, Mr. Chairman, it would create a Joint Congressional Committee on Congressional Representation. This committee would meet following each biennial election for Members of the House of Representatives. The purpose of this committee would be to decide whether there had been violations of seetion 2 and if so, it would determine the extent to which any State's representation would be reduced. In no case would representation be reduced below one.

House seats taken from States would be allocated to other States on the basis of population for the 2-year period in which the action would be in effect, thus keeping the total number of Representatives at 435.

If we are truly serious about protecting the right to vote, and we should be, Mr. Chairman, I sincerely believe that in addition to enforcing the 15th amendment, as does your bill, that we should be enforcing section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Mr. Chairman, the Celler bill is a good bill. I believe I also have proposed a good bill. Consequently, I urge that both bills be given careful consideration by your committee.

We cannot afford more delay on this important matter. We can do no less than to set up the machinery needed to secure once and for all the right to vote for all American citizens regardless of the color of their skin. This, after all, is the most basic of our constitutional rights. It is the very cornerstone of our democracy, the foundation of our representative form of government.

The long-sought goal of true equality in the polling place is within our reach. I hope, Mr. Chairman, as I know you do, that we will not permit this opportunity to slip away from us.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN R. SCHMIDHAUSER, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE STATE OF IOWA

Mr. Chairman, I speak today in support of the voting rights legislation which will, in my estimation, enforce fully the terms of the 15th amendment of the Constitution. The detailed analyses of systematic denial of the right to vote on the basis of color which have been provided in the past few years by the Civil Rights Commission, provide concrete evidence which has been dramatically underscored by the tragic events that have occured in Selma, Ala., in recent weeks. For those who attempt to question the constitutionality of this legislation, I would urge a fair reading of the precise terms in section 1 of the 15th amendment itself which states, "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." And more appropriately, section 2 provides the simple imperative that the Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Within the scope of its necessary objective, this bill, which when passed shall be known as the Voting Rights Act of 1965, fills a very definite need. It would be inappropriate to add amendments to this bill which might delay prospects for speedy enactment. But I would encourage this committee and my colleagues in the House of Representatives to consider sound supplemental legislation that will correct constitutional injustices which cannot be corrected by this provision. I urge subsequent consideration of H.J. Res. 377, a proposed constitutional amendment which will simplify and shorten the often lengthy and complex State residence requirements for voting. If blatant denial of voting rights continue, I would urge the Congress to soberly consider its long-existing constitutional authority and obligation, section 1, article 14, wherein the basis of representation may be reduced in proportion to the systematic denial of voting rights in violation of the Constitution. I commend the House Judiciary Committee on its speedy consideration of the voting rights bill of 1965 and express the fervent hope that this, the 89th Congress may speedily insure its voting rights which have been denied to so many of our people for virtually a century.

STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 6400, 89TH CONGRESS, 1ST SESSION, GIVEN BY LEONARD S. BROWN, MEMBER, ALEXANDRIA CITY DEMOCRATIO COMMITTEE

I wish to give here my statement as a testimony to my qualified support of H.R. 6400 (the Johnson administration's "Voting Rights Act of 1965"). I say “qualified support" of H.R. 6400 because I do not believe that the measure, as now drafted, goes far enough in enforcing the 15th amendment to the Constitution of the United States and in protecting the rights of my fellow Negro citizens to vote in the United States today. It is my belief that H.R. 6400 ought to be amended,

forthwith, to outlaw the poll tax once and for all-and in all elections, particularly State and local elections.

Without having first sought any legal advice on the matter here prior to the composition of my statement, I urge the specific amending of section 3 (b) to outlaw the poll tax, finally by further defining the phrase "test or device" as meaning, or including, "the payment of any tax or taxes, local, State; a head, capitation, or poll tax." This seemingly can be done by adding a subsection (4) to section 3(b). If this position is carried, as I most certainly urge here, it would require, inter alia, further amending by striking out completely subsection (e) of section 5, which accommodates the provision for, or existence, of the poll tax on the State and/or local level.

I believe that my position here is buttressed by the fact that H.R. 6400 purports to be a bill "To enforce the 15th amendment to the Constitution of the United State"; that article XV o fthe Constitution of the United States provides: "1. The right of the citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

“2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

Further, section 2 of H.R. 6400 provides: “No voting qualification or procedure shall be imposed or applied to deny or abridge the right to vote on account of race or color"; Section 3(a) of H.R. 6400 provides, in part: "No person shall be denied the right to vote in any Federal, State, or local election because of his failure to comply with any test or device, in any State or in any political subdivision of a State ***." and section 3 (b) of H.R. 6400 commences by providing, in part: "The phrase 'test or device' shall mean any requirement that a person as a prerequisite for voting or registration for voting. ***"

The poll tax (that residue still remaining on the State and local levels after the outlawing in the Federal election sphere by the 24th amendment) is most certainly a voting qualification and procedure in the remaining poll tax States; the poll tax is indeed a "test or device," with emphasis on the latter. That the poll tax operates as a voting qualification, procedure, and a "test or device" to deny and abridge the rights of Negroes to vote in the South, in violation of the 15th amendment, is demonstrated in the very raison d'etre of the poll tax itself and its inclusion in the election laws of the States of the South. There is also the exclusion of the poll tax requirement in Federal elections by the 24th amendment to the Constitution of the United States as a further indication of the taxes purpose to "deny and abridge" the right of Negroes to vote in the South.

If one must become scholarly or academic in justification of the directly above given views, one need only consult the works of Frederic D. Ogden (Cf. The Poll Tax in the South, 1958) and Frank Broyles Williams (Cf. The Poll Tax as a Suffrage Requirement in the South, 1952). But before these works, come, of course, the many volumes of testimony and debate gathered in the Congress when the matter of the poll tax has been before the National Legislature on too numerous occasions.

So it is my very strong position, and urging, that if the Congress can outlaw, by and through H.R. 6400, all voting qualifications, procedures and "test and device" which are "imposed or applied to deny or abridge the right to vote on account of race or color," i.e., in Federal, State, and local elections, it would certainly appear that it can, constitutionally, go one step further and outlaw the poll tax as a requirement to voting once and for always. The poll tax is a remaining qualification, procedure, and "test or device."

In conclusion, I again urge the committee to incorporate the above suggestion to outlaw the poll tax by the enactment of H.R. 6400. I support and urge the reporting out by the committee, and later adoption by the Congress, of the strongest "Voting Rights Act of 1965" that today's situation requires-one including the outlawing of the poll tax on the State and local levels of government once and for all always.

Respectfully submitted.

LEONARD S. BROWN,

Member, Alexandria City Democratic Committee.

The subcommittee will now adjourn and meet at 8 o'clock. (Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned, to reconvene at 8 p.m. the same day.)

VOTING RIGHTS

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 24, 1965-RESUMED

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE No. 5 OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY,
Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met at 8:15 p.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Emanuel Celler (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Celler, Rogers of Colorado, Donohue, Brooks, Kastenmeier, Corman, McCulloch, and Lindsay.

Also present: Representative Conyers.

Staff members present: Benjamin L. Zelenko, counsel, and William H. Copenhaver, associate counsel.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order.

Our first witness is the Honorable William F. Ryan of New York. Mr. Ryan, we are pleased to hear from you.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM F. RYAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. RYAN. Mr. Chairman, and distinguished members of the subcommittee: It is a pleasure to appear before you again tonight. When we adjourned this noon, I had described the bill which I have introduced, H.R. 6023, which I submit would secure the rights guaranteed by the 15th amendment, once and for all.

I described how, in my bill, the operative finding of disenfranchisement would be made by either the U.S. district court or the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Where either agency finds the right to vote has been denied because of race, color, or national origin, it would be mandatory for the President to create Federal registration offices and appoint Federal registrars and the Federal registration offices would be in motion.

By using the Commission on Civil Rights as an alternative to the Federal district courts for the purpose of making a finding requiring the President to establish a Federal registration office and appoint a Federal registrar, the hostile attitude of certain Federal judges will be avoided. For instance, District Judge Harold Cox, of Mississippi, would be unable to prevent the appointment of Federal registrars.

The Federal registrar would issue registration certificates to any applicant whom he finds to meet the residence, age, and sanity requirements for voting in the State. These are the only qualifications recognized. Literacy and constitutional interpretation tests as well as poll taxes are eliminated.

The Federal registrars, who could appoint deputies subject to the approval of the Attorney General, would oversee all elections, make tallies, and report any denials of the right to vote, or to have the vote counted, to the court or the Commission on Civil Rights.

My bill provides that the district court would have the power to issue injunctions and other orders to require local and State voting officials to permit persons issued certificates of registration by Federal registrars the right to vote and to have their votes counted.

The history of the struggle for the right to vote over the past 100 years shows that effective sanctions will be necessary. Therefore, the Federal courts would be empowered to void any election except for President, Vice President, or presidential electors, in which registration certificates issued by Federal registrars were not recognized and required to do so where 50 or more persons holding certificates were denied this right to vote.

It would be a crime punishable by a fine of not more than $5,000 or imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both, to interfere with anyone attempting to apply for a certificate of registration or to interfere with anyone who holds a certificate and is attempting to vote. The intimidation and economic coercion of Negroes in the South has been a prime deterrent to registration.

In my opinion, that bill would accomplish the objective of the administration's bill, H.R. 6400, in a more direct and effective manner. It would be operative upon a finding of discrimination, avoiding the problems inherent in an arbitrary 50-percent standard used to "trig ger" the appointment of examiners, and it would apply to all States and political subdivisions. Literacy, constitutional interpretation tests, and poll taxes would be outlawed. The only qualifications for voting would be age, residency, and sanity.

While I am convinced of the merits of my own bill, I believe that the administration's approach can accomplish the desired result. I would now like to address myself to several areas in which I believe the administration's bill, H.R. 6400, should be strengthened.

In the first place, Mr. Chairman, the legislation should provide for the appointment of Federal examiners in States or political subdivisions where no "test or device" is employed.

The language of section 4(a) (2) appears to authorize the appointment of examiners upon a certification by the Attorney General that in his judgment the appointment is necessary to enforce the guarantees of the 15th amendment.

However, I am informed that the Attorney General interprets this section as requiring both findings set forth in section 3 (a).

Assuming that is the committee's interpretation, then H.R. 6400 would not apply in a State or political subdivision where no "test or device" was employed even though less than 50 percent of persons of voting age were registered or voted in November 1964.

This is a significant omission which should be corrected. The legislation will not reach Arkansas, Florida, Tennessee, and Texas. These States have political subdivisions in which less than 50 percent of the persons of voting age voted in November 1964.

In nine counties in Arkansas and nine counties in Florida, all of which have a high percentage of Negroes, less than one-third of the eligible Negroes are registered to vote. In Crittenden County, Ark., al