criminate and the heavy hand of the Federal Government cannot interfere. In the State of New York, we also find a literacy test. Statistics indicate that, in the State as a whole, 63.2 percent of the voters actually cast their ballots in the last election. However, in New York City alone, thousands of persons of Puerto Rican descent are prohibited from voting because they cannot read and write in the English language. I understand that New York law provides that any person who has reached 21 years of age after January 1, 1922, must be able to read and write in English. Therefore, the following paragraphs from the March 22 editorial in the Wall Street Journal are particularly apropos; and I quote again: Of more consequences is the fact that if we have this law a citizen, white or Negro, can be entitled to vote in Alabama no matter how illiterate he is, or for that matter, even if he is a moron. But if the same citizen, white or Negro, lives in New York State he will not be entitled to vote. This would create a truly ingenious paradox. The illiterate citizen, Negro or otherwise, would find himself with more "rights" in Alabama and her five outcast sister States than in the great State of New York. More, the educational level of the voting citizens of Alabama, the low level of which is part of the general complaint against it by civil rights leaders, would be further reduced. And this by Federal sanction. Mr. Chairman, it was the practice, until very recent times, to determine the validity of a proposal by laying it alongside the Constitution. Every attempt at the exercise of authority had to be traced to some grant of power within the four corners of that document. Now, however, this time-tested method of reconciling purpose and power has been supplanted by a new standard. The new criteria for determining the constitutional validity of so-called civil rights bills consists, like the old audience reaction test of radio, of taking soundings of parading demonstrators. The old and secure moorings of a Nation of laws are in danger of being supplanted by mobs who hold the threat of mob action over the head of the Federal Government and its leaders. The catalog of defects suffered by this proposal makes it unquestionably unconstitutional. It would bar a State from using a literacy test for voting. It would disregard valid State requirements for the payment of poll taxes in order to vote in State elections. It assumes, without proof, that a coincidence of low registration or voting and the use of literacy tests necessarily means that there has been discrimination because of race. It thrusts the burden of proof upon a State to demonstrate that it has not discriminated; no prima facie case of present discrimination is required of the Federal Government. It makes past actions, going back 10 years, the basis for the imposition of present coercive reprisals. It vests virtually all jurisdiction to hear cases arising thereunder in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to the total disregard of the authorized and convenient forum. It gives virtually unlimited discretion to the Attorney General to send Federal officials to superintend State election processes and procedures. What is the new-found source of power to legislate away the powers of the individual States, Mr. Chairman? The bill states as its pur 46-535-65--38 pose the enforcement of the 15th amendment. Is that amendment the fountainhead of the limitless power presupposed by the sponsors of this proposal? Its framers did not think so. The Federal judiciary has sustained literacy tests by a consistent line of decisions, the most recent being Lassiter v. Northampton County Board of Elections, 360 U.S. 45 (1959). And the Congress, in enacting the 12th, 15th, 17th, 19th, 23d, and 24th amendments, acted in a manner contrary to any such presupposition. Also, Mr. Chairman, while the 15th amendment states that no person shall be denied the right to vote on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, nowhere does it say or even suggest that a certain percentage of citizens in any State must vote. It is in Russia and other Communist countries that citizens are required to vote. Mr. Chairman, this measure is not right-to-vote legislation as it has been labeled. Rather, it is an unwise antiliteracy bill, which in itself is discriminatory. In the words of a March 17 Wall Street Journal editorial and I quote: This is a wholly different thing. At some time, and in some places every rule-restriction, if you prefer-has been abused to discriminate against a Negro voter. But it does not at all follow that every such rule, or restriction, is unwise or improper in itself. Age limitations, residence requirements, the ability to read and write the language in which society's affairs are carried on, all these things have much to commend them. In any event, a Federal law to sweep them away would violate that selfsame Constitution which the President asks us not to flout with prejudice. In two separate places, in identical language, the Constitution gives to the States the right to set such standards. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully urge the members of this committee to examine carefully the far-reaching provisions and implications of H.R. 6400 and not to be governed by the emotions of the moment. Thank you very much. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Selden, I would like to read to you a portion of the decision rendered by United States District Judge Johnson in the case of Hosea Williams, et al., (U.S. of America, Intervenor), against Gov. George Wallace. The decision in part reads as follows: As reflected by appendix A and I am going to place the appendix A to this opinion in the record— the efforts of these Negro citizens to secure this right to register to vote in some of these counties, have accomplished very little. For instance, in Dallas County, as of November 1964, where Negro citizens of voting age outnumber white citizens of voting age, only 2.2 percent of the Negroes were registered to vote. In Perry County as of August 1964, where the Negro citizens of voting age outnumber white citizens, only 7 percent of the Negroes were registered to vote. In Wilcox County as of December 1963, where the Negro citizens of voting age outnumber white citizens over 2 to 1, zero percent of the Negro citizens were registered to vote as contrasted with the registration of 100 percent of the white citizens of voting age in this county. In Hale County, where Negro citizens of voting age outnumber white citizens, only 3.6 percent of these Negro citizens have been registered to vote. The evidence in this case reflects that, particularly as to Selma, Dallas County. Ala., an almost continuous pattern of conduct has existed on the part of Defendant Sheriff Clark, his deputies, and his auxiliary deputies known as "posse men" of harassment, intimidation, coercion, threatening conduct, and, sometimes, brutal mistreatment toward these Plaintiffs and other members of their class who were engaged in their demonstrations for the purpose of encouraging Negroes to attempt to register to vote and to protest discriminatory voter registration practices in Alabama. (Document referred to follows:) APPENDIX A Dallas County, Ala., registration statistics (November 1964) 1 Figures not obtained; the Board accepted applications on 1 day in October 1964. White.. Perry County, Ala., registration statistics (Aug. 17, 1964) 0 1 1 33805438 13 37 6 0 6 15 10 16 42 3262 823 10 1 No report. White.. 4310 4AAA 434 54 29.2 88.9 13 14 Wilcox County, Ala., registration statistics (December 1963) 1959. 1960. 1961. 1962. To Oct. 17, 1963. Total... Accepted Rejected Percent rejected 1 A total of 11 rejected applications filed with the Board are by persons believed to be white, 9 of the m were rejected because the applicant did not possess the residency requirements to register to vote or they were not of proper age to register. 1 applicant was rejected for inability to complete the application, and t form was marked "disqualified due to inability to complete application," but the applicant was registered to vote on the basis of this application. White.. January. Hale County, Ala., registration statistics (December 1964) February. March. April.. May. June. July. August September.. October.. November. December. January. March. April.. May. June. July. August. September October. November. December 1964 January. Accepted Rejected Percent rejected White Negro White Negro White Negro 5 14832314238 178215362425 Between 1954 and August 1963, 134 undated applications were rejected by the board of registrars; of these, 120 were filed by Negroes and 14 were filed by white applicants. 1 Rejected figures are for applications filed after Feb. 11, 1964. Marengo County, Ala., registration statistics (January 1962-December 1964) 1 In addition 2 forms filed by white persons and rejected by the board are undated: and 1 form filed in Feb ruary 1964 and 1 in March 1964 do not indicate race. |