Has the Federal Court ruled about the Florida situation? Justice CALDWELL. Yes; we have a Federal ruling requiring apportionment not later than July, I believe. The legislature will meet in its regular session in April for 60 days, and in special session in July to consider the matter of reapportionment. Reapportionment has been a problem in Florida for many years. Back in 1945, I called upon the legislature to reapportion.They failed to do it in a regular session. I called them back in special session and held them for 54 days and there was some reapportionment. It has continued to be a problem because of the rapidly growing population in the southeastern area of the State and in the southern part generally. Senator BAYH. Could you paint just very quickly that picture to us as far as the concentration of population in the Miami and the southeastern part? What percentage do we have there? Are those figures available to you, sir? If not, we will find them elsewhere. Justice CALDWELL. I should say that the southeastern area around Dade County represents about a third of the total vote of the State. And, of course, that area is still growing rapidly. Other parts of the State are moving ahead very fast also. Other parts of the State are moving, percentagewise, more rapidly now than the Dade County area. But I should say that the southeast area in the neighborhood of Dade represents approximately a third. Then the central part of the State-that is, say, from St. Petersburg across to DaytonaSenator BAYI. That would include Örlando? Justice CALDWELL. Including Orlando-would be another third. And then that large northern area the remainder. Senator BAYH. Let me ask you one other question and then I will let my colleagues have the benefit of your wisdom. We are faced with two opposing philosophies here. One philosophy talks about the tyranny of the majority when we are talking about a one-man, one-vote system. Then the other philosophy talks about the pressing opposition of the minority which is like the tail wagging the dog in some of our legislative branches-some of our legislatures. I think it is particularly appropriate to ask this question because of your position, not only as a member of the highest court in your State, but also having served as its chief executive: In the office of Governor or as a member of the supreme court, did you observe any examples you would care to put into the record of where the rural areas, the less sparsely populated areas have opposed legislation that was needed for metropolitan areas, or quite to the contrary, do you have examples where the large city representatives have been nonresponsive to the needs of the rural areas? Justice CALDWELL. I do have a comment on that. I served as a Pember of the Florida Legislature, as Senator Holland did. I sucreeded Senator Holland as Governor. And I wish you would call on Senator Holland for his views on this question. Senator BAYH. His views are always welcome. Justice CALDWELL. In all of my experience in that State, I have never seen one single important question determined on the basis of section. I have never seen one important question involving the urban areas that was decided adversely to them on the basis of sectionalism. On the contrary, there have been many instances in which the rural area or the urban areas had important and vital questions in which there has been a joining of the hands. Now, I have watched that intimately since 1929, and while there is always a disagreement going on about apportionment, when the chips are down and vital problems are to be settled, sectionalism has played no part. Senator BAYH. That pretty well transcends political lines, this business of apportionment. Senator Holland, do you care to expand on that? Senator HOLLAND. Like Governor Caldwell, I served in the legislature. I was there 8 years. I came from and still come from the largest agricultural county in our State and the largest one in the whole South, I believe one of the largest in the Nation in its production and its volume. We frequently had to ask for legislation, for instance in the setting up of cooperative agricultural organizations, in the creation of a brandnew system of laws affecting our citrus industry, in matters affecting the drainage of the everglades, which did not directly pertain to my county but did directly pertain to the agricultural group of which I was regarded always as one of the members many other similar matters. I never found the slightest disagreement or unwillingness on the part of senators from the large urban areas such as Miami, Tampa, Jacksonville, all of which lay outside of the direct zone of application of these particular problems. to cooperate with us. I never found any unwillingness on the part of the timber-producing, naval stores areas, part of the north of our State to look at us and our problems, which affected the central part of the State and its agricultural problems and in its development problems. They always went along with us when we were on good sound ground. I think the only disagreement that I can recall that has transpired in our State, and this did not come during the period of my own service, has been on the question of reapportionment. That has been a question of difference because of the great growth of the State. It has grown out of, let us say, slowness of the areas which formerly had a much greater share of the population of the State than they now have to yield any of their representation. I think Governor Caldwell and I both know that our State has been too slow to recognize its great growth in this matter of reapportionment, And I, for one, would not want to deprive the Federal courts of jurisdiction in checking upon the application of the standards developed, approved, and adopted by our State or by any other State if complete unwillingness to follow those standards should develop later in the State after those standards were adopted. But neither would I ever want to give to the Federal court such authority as to name those standards. I think that that is going much too far and I think that our own system in our 50 States, showing each its own problems and each its own developments, has painted a very beautiful picture of what can be done when each area is given some say in its government. I have been to our 49th and 50th States. Both afford a need for great development. Alaska is a little more than twice as big as Texas. I believe that substantially half of its population now is in the environs of the two cities of Anchorage and Fairbanks. I think that the need for development there is very great. I think that the differences there between one area of that great new State and other parts are very great. I would hate to see any program adopted which exclusively gave to those areas of large population complete control of the legislative processes in that State. I am exceedingly interested in its proper development and I would not want to see any departure from American tradition, so well represented in our various constitutional provisions in the various States, for the distribution of power in each house of our legislature and for the distribution in the one house, Senator Hruska, of the legislature in your great State. I would not want to see any departure from that at all. I have been to Hawaii. My recollection is that there are seven or eight populated islands. My recollection is that the Island of Oahu has, let us say, four-fifths of the population of the State. I think it can be demonstrated, though I do not have the late figures, that the city of Honolulu and its environs have more than half of the population of the State. This is subject to check. I am simply reporting from my own observation. I would hate to see any system developed by which the people in some of these islands which are more or less remote from Oahu, some of them several hundred miles away, were practically without the chance to name one of their own citizens to represent them in the legislature of Hawaii, where they would have to go hundreds of miles to contact their own representatives, as well, of course, as to plead for their own cause before the legislature of that far-flung new State. I have been to Nevada and seen the great need for development there and I believe that substantially half, maybe more than half of the population of that State is concentrated in the environs of Reno and Las Vegas. I doubt if those outlying areas of Nevada, which are so greatly in need of additional development, could with propriety under our American system be deprived of a direct vote in one house, at least, of the Nevada Legislature. I have been over to Delaware, our oldest State, the first one to adopt a State constitution. I think that if strict population standards were applied, the middle of the three counties, the one where Wilmington is located, has the dominant population. I would doubt if it would be sound to disturb their well-conceived, carefully distributed balance of power in that oldest State. I have cited these few simply to illustrate that from our oldest State to our very youngest, and there are many instances in between, there are needs for additional development. There are needs for a departure from complete centralized control in one neighborhood. There is a need for continuing recognition of the right of the State depending upon its power, the people of each State, to determine for themselves how, under their peculiar stage of developTent, and looking forward always to greater development, how they would apportion the representation in at least one house of their legislature. I believe that is about all the amplification I could give. I support completely the statement of Mr. Justice Caldwell. I would go a good deal farther in the matter that I have just mentioned. I think that the States are so very varied in their development, some of which have developed so uniformly that they have already adopted the one-manone-vote principle, and some of which are not even approaching that 48 124-65--25 stage of development as yet and probably never will because of the difference in soil and resources in those several States. I would not want to see, ever, any departure from the American principle, dominant since we were colonies, that the people of the particular State, knowing their own problems, should have the decision as to how their legislature how their legislative power should be distributed, now confined, as it would be, to one house because of the precedent that seems to have been laid down and which most of the people of our country seem to be unwilling to overturn when it is applied to only one house of the legislature. Senator BAYH. Thank you, Senator Holland. Let me add one fact here and then this is all the questioning I care to participate in. I am sure my colleagues will have some others if you gentlemen have the time and continued patience that you have exhibited. I have records here that show the example that the Senator shows of Hawaii. The three largest counties in Hawaii, which certainly would include Honolulu, comprise 95.5 percent of the entire population. My first glance would seem to indicate that that county in which Honolulu is located would probably have a little better than 75 percent of the population. Senator HOLLAND. And that point that you make does not mention either the great distances between the islands. I have not been to the outermost islands. I understand they are about 700 miles away, but I have been to several of the islands which are separated by the sea, long distances of the sea, from Oahu as the map will well show. My recollection is that there is about 700 miles spread from one end to the other of this group of islands which constitute our very interesting and newest State, which certainly has great potentiality for additional development and I am sure has great desire for additional development. Senator BAYH. I appreciate the detail in which the Senator describes the Hawaii situation. I am just wondering, perhaps I should consult with my colleagues on the subcommittee, perhaps we should give some thought to an on-the-scene investigation to see whether the disparity is as great as the Senator described. Senator HOLLAND. I am sure Governor Caldwell and I are in 95 percent agreement, but we hope that if you drink in the charms of Hawaii, you will not be content without doing the same thing about coming to Florida. Senator BAYH. We would like to drink in the charms of both of those great States, but I think we had better do it at our own expense and not that of the taxpayers. I have carried this questioning on too long, but I wanted to get the opinion of both of you, who have had such great experiences in all three branches of the Government and the law, including that of the legislative branch of the United States. Senator Tydings? Senator TYDINGS. Let me say before I ask any questions that it is indeed a treat for our subcommittee to have Governor Caldwell. I have been a great admirer of Governor Caldwell for many years. I had the great pleasure of meeting him in 1960 and to have both Governor Caldwell and Senator Holland at the same time adds icing to the cake. Governor, just a couple of questions. I know what your answer is, but in your judgment, if we adopted the Dirksen amendment, would that take precedence insofar as the reasonableness of factors is concerned on reapportionment over the 14th and 15th amendments? Justice CALDWELL. Yes, sir; I think it would. Senator TYDINGS. I felt that that was the thrust of your testimony. Let me ask you something else. In your Florida constitution, do you have a provision which requires automatic, regular, periodic reapportionment of either house? Justice CALDWELL. On a 10-year basis. The constitution requires review of the situation once each 10 years. Senator TYDINGS. In both houses? Justice CALDWELL. Both houses. Senator TYDINGS. Does it actually direct the legislature to reapportion or not? What does it do? Justice CALDWELL. Yes; but there is some division of opinion about how compulsory that requirement is and it has been observed in the breach as well as in the observance. Senator TYDINGS. The reason I ask you that, Governor, is we have the same provision in the Maryland constitution and the legislature has even gone so far as to put the matter on referendum in the State of Maryland to determine whether or not the people wanted the State reapportioned and when they said yes, the legislature still-and I was a member of the body-disregarded it. I was wondering whether Florida had that same history, too. Governor, one problem which bothers me, assuming that the constitutional amendment is passed and ratified, before a State such as my own, Maryland, or another State which is badly malapportioned, takes any effort to reapportion itself, do you feel that a legislature could reasonably be expected, once this amendment is adopted, a legislature which is already badly apportioned, could they reasonably be expected to make any effort to reapportion one house? Justice CALDWELL. Yes; I think you can expect them to make a good-faith effort. But of course, you always have the human factor of voting oneself out of office. It is a compulsive sort of condition. Senator TYDINGS. It is almost too much to ask. Justice CALDWELL. It makes it very difficult. Senator TYDINGS. For that reason, let me ask you one final question: Do you feel that there would ever come a time when the legislature, by its apportionment of one house, could be so completely unreasonable as to be subject to judicial review or not? I know we have asked you questions all around that? Justice CALDWELL. As I read the Federal Constitution, my answer would be subject to State judicial review but not by Federal judicial review. Senator TYDINGS. But you do think that it would be subject to judicial review in the State? Justice CALDWELL. Yes, I do. Senator TYDINGS. And in your State now, in your State constitution, do you have a bill of rights or similar type of thing? Justice CALDWELL. Quite similar to that found in most States. |