
          An Update on Voting Changes in the South
          By StaffStaff
          Vol. 4, No. 2, 1982, pp. 5-11
          
          Since last summer, when legislative committees began meeting
quietly and computers started humming, reapportionment in the South
has charged into the political thicket like a herd of . . . well,
elephants, some white Southern Democrats are now claiming, creating
thunderous noise along ancient paths. Even as the campaigns approach,
Southern legislative leaders hold fast to the belief that
redistricting plans must protect incumbents and cap, if not minimize,
minority voting strength.
          An unexpected obstacle in the path of Southern reapportionment has
been the Justice_Department, which reviews all voting
changes--including redistricting--in eight Southern_states. Empowered
by the Voting_Rights_Act, the Attorney_General (in practice, the
Assistant Attorney_General and the staff of the voting_rights section)
is required to disapprove a voting change if the local or state
government fails to prove that its plan is not racially discriminatory
in purpose or effect.
          The surprising fact is that the Reagan Administration's Justice
Department has enforced this provision and disapproved of statewide
redistricting plans in Georgia, South_Carolina, North_Carolina,
Virginia, and Texas. While approving a congressional district plan in
Alabama, Justice is expected by inside observers to object to
statewide plans in Alabama and Louisiana. It hasn't acted in
Mississippi yet.
          In the face of the Reagan Administration's weakening position on
renewal of the Voting_Rights_Act, tax laws for segregation academies,
and other civil_rights issues, this string of objections is unique, if
not miraculous. While civil_rights lawyers are cautious in commenting
on the pattern, Southern Democrats in the state Legislatures say the
motivation is an opportunity for Republican political gains.
          For example, some white North_Carolina Democrats from Charlotte,
Raleigh, and Greensboro charge that Justice's interest in
single-member districts stems from a political awareness that
Republican candidates in suburban areas will be helped by the creation
of majority black_districts in urban areas, leaving white Democrats
with out a majority in much of the metropolitan area.
          Some white Democrats in Georgia echo that sentiment as they now
protest Justice's objection to a 57 percent majority black
congressional district which the state legislature passed as it turned
down a 69 percent district. "The Republican Administration is
interested in getting rid of two white Democrats," an administrative
assistant to a Georgia congressman said, "and replacing them with a
black and a Republican."
          Southern black state legislators (who are without exception also
Democrats) counter these arguments with a string of facts about
specific redistricting plans. They note that while objecting to
several Southern redistricting plans, Justice often stops short of
disapproving of most of the districts which were drawn to cancel or
reduce black voting strength. In Georgia the legislature adopted a
plan that will reduce by one the number of majority black_districts in
Atlanta and failed to draw several majority black_districts in the
rural Black_Belt. In its objection to the plan, Justice did not
disapprove of these districts but focused on three districts
elsewhere. "It's more of an approval than a disapproval of
discriminatory districts," says State Rep. Tyrone Brooks about
Justice's actions-in Georgia.
          Moreover, despite possible Republican gains in some redistricting,
white Democratic legislators have diluted black voting strength in
places where Democrats would be replaced not by Republicans, but by
other Democrats. Here the winning Democrat would, however, be a
black. And there lies the rub.
          From Virginia to Texas, legislatures have drawn districts in rural,
heavily black or Hispanic areas that reduce or maintain at a low level
the voting strength of a majority of non-whites. This pattern appears
throughout the South's Black_Belt despite the fact that the population
of this rural, predominantly black area has increased in several
states. The Alabama legislature's plan shaved off enough percentages
in five existing districts with at least 60 percent black_population
so that blacks in the proposed districts do not have a voting
majority. Almost every Southern state adheres to similar practice.
          In recent weeks the federal_courts have begun to intervene in state
reapportionment, usually issuing orders for new plans where the state
is unable to adopt a lawful plan in time to get the 1982 elections
underway. While the 

courts have been seen as a major protection for
black voting interests in the past, the early court orders in Southern
reapportionment show no substantial promise that the courts will offer
sweeping remedies for black_voters. In South_Carolina, a federal_court
has adopted the congressional plan which the lower chamber of the
South_Carolina legislature had passed over the objections of the
legislative black caucus. In Texas, the two court orders for
congressional and state house redistricting offer a mixture of
improvements and disappointments for minority voters. Lawsuits asking
for court orders in other states are pending in Virginia, North
Carolina, South_Carolina, and Alabama.
          Below is a summary of the reapportionment efforts in the 11
Southern_states.
          
            Alabama
          
          Air traffic between Montgomery and Washington D.C., has been heavy
in the last few weeks with several confabs between legislators and
Justice_Department officials. Legislators and attorneys representing
the state have met with U.S. Assistant Attorney_General William
Bradford Reynolds and his staff several times, and legislative black
caucus members as well as civil_rights lawyers and community leaders
have also journeyed to Washington to urge objections to the
reapportionment plans for the state house and senate.
          The groups voicing opposition to the state plan include the NAACP,
ACLU, Common Cause, Alabama Democratic Conference and the League of
Women Voters. These groups opposed the plans during the special
session last fall and have protested both the plans and the
closed-door decisions that developed them.
          Recent data from the Alabama legislative staff indicate the state
plan proposes to reduce black voting strength at the polls not only in
the Black_Belt but in districts presently held by black incumbents
elsewhere. In the Black_Belt, white State Rep. Bill Edwards's district
is reduced from a 70 percent black majority to 50 percent. Rep. Rick
Manley's district is reduced to 59 percent and Rep. Leigh Pegue's
district drops to 55 percent black. Both are presently above 65
percent. Manley served as chairman of the reapportionment committee
and has been one of the principal lawmakers visiting Washington.
          In urban areas the black percentages in some districts are also
significantly reduced. Rep. Yvonne Kennedy, chairwoman of the
legislative black caucus, saw her Mobile district go from 80 percent
to 69 percent black and black State Rep. Bill Clark's district in the
Mobile area was also reduced from 90 to 68 percent black. In the
Birmingham area, the reapportionment plan goes even further. It
eliminates a black district--thus pitting two black incumbents against
each other. Another district previously more than 60 percent black
will be only 53 percent black. All told, the proposed plan would
eliminate as many as five districts where black_voters could elect
responsive candidates.
          A group of Alabama citizens has filed a federal_court suit in
Montgomery, alleging the plan violates "one person - one vote" and
the voting_rights of blacks. Meanwhile, Justice has granted the state
an extension until April 15 to explain its plans. Capitol insiders
suggest that legislative leaders are ready to compromise and are
developing plans which they hope will appease Justice and minority
objections.
          The Justice_Department recently approved the Alabama Congressional
plan which was not the subject of controversy.
          
            Arkansas
          
          Declaring that the plan violated the constitutional doctrine of
"one person - one vote," a federal_court struck down the Arkansas
congressional reapportionment plan which had proposed hardly any
changes from the 1970 plan. The court is forcing the legislature to
try again to hold the differences between the populations of each
district to reasonable limits.
          But it is legislative, not congressional reapportionment that
continues to be the subject of talk by activists in Little Rock. Civil
rights advocates still hope to challenge the state legislative
redistricting plan which is a mixture of single and multi-member
districts. For the last several years the Arkansas legislature has had
only three or four black members.
          "It's that damn 'purpose'," explains the head of a biracial
lobbying group in Little Rock. "We know one of the primary purposes of
the plan was to minimize the black vote in legislative races, but proving it was the purpose has us stumped for now."
Arkansas is not covered under Section_5 of the Voting_Rights_Act and
the congressional and state plans need not be submitted to Justice for
approval. In court, plaintiffs are required to prove both the purpose
and effects of racial discrimination in voting cases.
          
            Georgia
          
          In early March, the Justice_Department notified Georgia officials
that it was maintaining its original objection to Georgia's
congressional plan, where the dispute centers around a majority black
district in the Atlanta metropolitan area. State officials promptly
challenged Justice's objection in federal_court in Washington.
          The plan submitted to Justice unsuccessfully includes a fifth
district that is 57 percent black. This was adopted during the special
session last summer only after the state house refused twice to accept
a congressional plan passed by the Georgia senate that included a 69
percent black district. Black legislators vehemently objected to the
compromise plan which passed the senate by only a few votes and over
the objections of Georgia's two black senators, Horace Tate and Julian
Bond, as well as the senate minority and majority leaders.
          Justice objected also to parts of the state house and senate
plans. The General_Assembly then changed the house and senate plan to
meet the requirement from Washington.
          In the senate, Justice's objection included two districts, one in
metropolitan Atlanta (DeKalb County) and the other in Augusta. The
legislators changed the DeKalb district to increase the black
percentage to nearly 70. The Augusta district was drawn to increase
the black_population to 53 percent. The latter district is the seat of
Senate majority leader Tom Allgood.
          In the house Justice's objection was to the Dougherty County house
seats in southwest Georgia. Though the 

county's black_population has
grown by nearly 10 percent in the last few years, reapportionment
created only one black house district--the one which now has a black
incumbent. Black legislators and community groups protested the
dilution of minority voting strength in the rural Black_Belt of
Georgia, particularly the area around Dougherty. The Dougherty plan
was redrawn to create two black_districts--one with a 69 percent black
majority and one with a 59 percent majority.
          State officials' refusal to cooperate on the congressional issue
was the result of pressure from lame-duck Gov. George Busbee and newly
appointed state attorney general Michael Bowers. Bowers must run for
election in the fall.
          A three-judge panel has been appointed for the state's appeal in
Washington and the Georgia legislative black caucus has intervened
along with private citizens. The NAACP is also requesting the right to
intervene. Although the state opposed intervention, the judges ruled
on March 22 in favor of the caucus and private plaintiffs.
          State Rep. Billy Randall, chairman of the black caucus, criticized
the the action by-Bowers and others as continued discrimination
against minorities, but he is equally dissatisfied with Justice's
objection. Randall believes the objection did not go far enough in
disapproving dilution of black voting strength in house and senate
districts in the Georgia Black_Belt.
          
            Florida
          
          In Florida the battle lines on reapportionment appear to be drawn
as clearly between the house and senate as between the legislature and
community groups. Unlike most states, Florida's two legislative houses
have been unable to reach a "gentlemen's agreement" where each house
will draw up its own plan which would be adopted automatically by the
other. The result is the development of house and senate plans by both
houses. And none agrees with any other.
          Though there is disagreement between the two bodies, both have
created plans with single-member districts for the first time in
Florida reapportionment history. Both house and senate plans have kept
the total population deviation to less than two percent in each
district. Legislators believe both these actions will protect against
possible lawsuits.
          One major disagreement revolves around the "nesting" of
districts--a device which places a few house districts within the
"nest" of a larger senate district. Alabama has used such a plan since
its last reapportionment. Florida's house supports such a concept, but
not the senate.
          Another disagreement between the houses is the senate election
schedule. Florida's senate members are elected for four-year terms,
one-half elected every two years. The senate would like to have the
senators elected in 1980 serve until 1984 and then run under new
district lines. The result would be that only half the senators would
have to run in November under the reapportioned districts. The house
has refused to agree to such a plan amid rumors that a number of house
members are interested in a senate seat.
          Florida's constitution allows from 80 to 120 house members and
between 30-40 senators. Here the senate and house also disagree. The
most recent senate plan creates an 80-member house. But the house plan
(which is expected to eventually be accepted) calls for a 120member
body--its present size.
          The disputes between the two houses have spilled over to community
groups involved in reapportionment. The NAACP supports the senate's
plans and Common Cause has backed the house's plans. The groups have
developed individual alternative plans with only limited support for
each other's actions.
          Common Cause developed a plan which some black legislators and
NAACP leaders believe will result in fewer voting-majority black
districts. Common Cause maintains that its plan creates the most
minority districts in the house (nine black and four Hispanic
districts with over 50 percent minority populations). While admitting
that its criteria for a "black or Hispanic" district is 50 percent or
more minority population, Common Cause maintains that it has taken
into account "population growth, voter_registration, and voting
patterns." In most Southern_states the minority population eligible to
vote is usually 10 percentage points below the total minority
population.
          The house plan presently includes seven districts with 58 to 80
percent Hispanic population--all in the Miami area. Only two districts
are more than 65 percent Hispanic. The plan includes seven black
districts between 52 and 73 percent, and three black_districts between
43 and 49 percent. Only one district in the Miami area is 65 percent
or more black. The others are scattered throughout the state. A major
concern of community groups is the lack of consideration shown to
Florida's Black_Belt, the area surrounding Tallahassee.
          The Common Cause plan allows for a 53 percent majority-black
district including Leon County in the Black_Belt. The plan also
includes a 56 percent black district in metropolitan Miami where the
house plan creates a 45 percent black district. Five blacks and two
Hispanic legislators now sit in the Florida house.
          Senate plans passed by either house include two Hispanic districts
over 50 percent around Miami. The house plan creates a district that
is 65 percent Hispanic while the senate plan calls for a 61 percent
district in its own chamber. Both plans create a district around
Jacksonville that is 47 to 48 percent black.
          Community groups have indicated that there is little likelihood of
creating congressional districts with more than 35 percent black
population.
          
            Louisiana
          
          The Justice_Department could decide before the end of April if the
Louisiana congressional redistricting plan violates the Voting Rights
Act. Civil rights groups and the senate legislative black caucus, who
supported a majority black congressional district during the last
legislative session, have filed comments against the state plan which
divides the parish of New_Orleans almost in half.
          In its pleadings before Justice, the black caucus notes that, were
it not for the governor's veto, Louisiana would now have a plan with a
majority black congressional district composed of the Orleans
parish. Late last year when the Democratic legislature adopted a 55
percent black district, Republican Gov. Dave Treen vetoed the
bill. Quickly abandoning the majority black district, the legislature
drew the plans to adhere to the governor's objections. That plan
passed and is now before Justice.

          Reapportionment plans for the two houses of the state legislature
are also before Justice, which asked in March for more information
about their origins. Objections are also being raised to these plans
which create 14 legislative districts with 50 percent or more black
populations. To illustrate that the plans effectively dilute black
voting strength, the black caucus has developed an alternative plan
that creates 20 legislative districts with a majority of black
registered voters.
          Some observers believe the congressional plan may test the
willingness of Justice to enforce Section_5 regardless of party
politics. Much of the case against the congressional plan focuses on
the veto of Gov. Treen, one of the few Republican governors in a
Southern state covered by the Voting_Rights_Act. "No case I've seen
before Justice better evidences that a plan was rejected by the
legislators because it helped urban blacks," commented a lawyer
working with a legal defense fund in Washington. "We'll see if Justice
sees the evidence differently because of Treen."
          
            Mississippi
          
          Schooled in more than a decade of litigation opposing fair
reapportionment, the Mississippi legislature has proceeded with
redistricting its two houses and five congressional seats with a
wealth of computer runs and detailed maps and a careful avoidance of
any plan that increases the potential for added voting strength of
blacks. Turning back efforts of the legislative black caucus to create
a majority black congressional district, leading state lawmakers
appear willing to assure black incumbents of their seats, to limit
majority-black_districts to the number provided in the existing
court-ordered plan, and generally to adopt "a holding action," in the
words of one veteran civil_rights worker in Jackson.
          The fight over the congressional plan late last year centered on
the creation of a majority-black district from the Delta
counties. Several plans were proposed in hearings and on the floor of
the legislature which had districts with black_populations ranging
from 53 percent to 65 percent. All began somewhere in the Delta
counties and the "65 percent" proposal by black State Sen. Henry
J. Kirksey encompassed part of the Delta and the city of Jackson.
          The congressional plan, approved by a 4 to 1 vote, maintained the
character of the existing congressional districts. The new plan is now
before the Justice department and is being opposed by members of the
black caucus and statewide civil_rights groups.
          The likely reapportionment plan for the two state houses will
maintain 46 majority-black_districts in which 17 incumbent black
legislators now reside. Of the 46, only 2S house and senate districts
will have black majorities of 60 percent or more, a critical fact in a
state where the black registration rate is usually 10 to 15 percentage
points below the general population. Sen. Kirksey has proposed
alternatives to the state plan but has been unable to convince a
substantial number of his colleagues that his plan better avoids
dilution of black voting strength. "Too many of the districts that are
majority black barely hang over the 50 percent line" remarked David
Green, a member of the legislative black caucus. "These districts just
appear to be majority black when they really aren't."
          Challenges to the redistricting plans for the legislature before
Justice and the courts are also expected in Mississippi.
          
            North_Carolina
          
          With the advice of former U.S. assistant attorney general Jerris
Leonard, North_Carolina state lawmakers passed their third set of
reapportionment plans in March, combining historical multi-member
districts with a few single-member districts which they hope will
satisfy the Justice_Department's earlier objections. Lawyers for the
NAACP Legal Defense Fund, however, are predicting another Justice
objection to the new state house and senate plans.
          While a lawsuit in the mid-1960s required the redistricting of the
general assembly, North_Carolina had been immune to much of the
disputes over redistricting that spread across the South in the
1970s. Its recent problems began when the NAACP Legal Defense Fund
filed suit in federal district court in Raleigh challenging the state
legislative plans, the congressional plan, and a state constitutional
amendment passed in 1968 requiring that all state legislative
districts follow county lines. That amendment had not been submitted
for approval to Justice as required under the Voting_Rights_Act.
          Justice found late last year that the requirement diluted the
voting strength of blacks and disapproved it. Meanwhile, legislative
leaders were convinced that the differences in population among the
various legislative districts were greater than the courts would
permit under the "one person - one vote" constitutional theory. Thus,
the general assembly reconvened and passed a new plan for its state
house.
          The old state senate plan and the new house plan were then
submitted to the Justice_Department which found that both followed the
1968 amendment and diluted black voting strength. Justice also found
that the congressional plan had the purpose of diluting black voting
strength by eliminating Durham, a center of political activity for
blacks, from the second congressional district that has a black
population of over 40 percent.
          In early February, North_Carolina lawmakers returned in special
session and adopted a third set of reapportionment plans and for the
first time created some single-member districts which crossed county
lines.
          No other issue seems to have caused as much stir in North_Carolina
legislative politics in recent history. "Some of us are being
sacrificed on the altar," said State Sen. Melvin Daniels who
represents part of the northeastern section of the state. The new
house plan creates two majority-black_districts and the senate plan
has one 52 percent majority-black district. The legislature carefully
avoided drawing single-member districts in the metropolitan areas such
as Charlotte Winston-Salem, and Raleigh, since those areas are not
covered under section 5 of the Voting_Rights_Act.
          J.K. Butterfield, a black leader from northeastern North_Carolina,
presented a reapportionment plan at a public hearing which would
create a total of nine majority black_districts in the house and
senate. But his plan was never introduced. For a time, the legislature
did consider creating another majority-black senate district but
apparently decided one was enough.
          The new congressional plan was approved in early March and may
prompt a black former U.S. attorney from Durham to challenge incumbent
U.S. Rep. L.H. 

Fountain in the Democratic primary.
          Several observers are predicting that by mid-April the Justice
Department will bar the use of the third set of state legislative
plans. While state officials have threatened to appeal an adverse
ruling by Justice to the federal_courts in Washington, the legislature
passed a new bill providing for four different possible dates for
primary elections--all hinging on when a state house and senate plan
would become lawful. That law, too, is now before Justice.
          
            South_Carolina
          
          In a surprising decision, a federal_court panel adopted in early
March a congressional plan for South_Carolina which had been passed
earlier by the state house of representatives but not by the state
senate. The NAACP, which had filed suit asking the court to draw the
congressional lines, protested the court's opinion and promised to
appeal the decision and seek an objection from the Justice
Department.
          The court-ordered plan makes few changes in the present
congressional districts, although it does split Berkeley County, a
suburb of Charleston. The division of the metropolitan area into two
congressional districts rubbed some powerful state senators the wrong
way, and they refused to approve the plan when it was before them.
          The NAACP has presented to the federal_court a plan that created a
district with a majority black_population. In a hearing on the issue,
senior district judge Charles E. Simons attacked the NAACP plans as
"gerrymandered to give more than 50 percent blacks." The state house
plan which the court has embraced has no congressional district with
more than a 40 percent black_population.
          State legislative officials are moving rapidly to have the new plan
implemented. State senate judiciary committee chairman L. Marion
Gressette, one of the most powerful men in South_Carolina politics,
contends that the court plan need not be submitted to Justice for
review under the Voting_Rights_Act. Civil rights lawyers disagree, and
another legal battle may develop.
          While the South_Carolina legislature hopes that it may be near the
finish line with congressional reapportionment, it still faces the
task of drawing new lines for its own two houses. Justice disapproved
the first plan of the state house because of the discriminatory
effects of district lines, primarily in the Black_Belt areas where the
legislature systematically leveled the percentages of blacks.
          The state senate hasn't even begun to consider a redistricting
plan. The all-white legislative chamber is postponing the task on the
apparent hope that it can secure Justice approval of a plan more
easily later in the year. Some black leaders, including members of the
legislative black caucus, have charged that the state senators hope
the Voting_Rights_Act will be weakened before the fall and that a plan
without any majority black_districts would be subjected to less
scrutiny under a new act.
          The all-white senate has been a subject of challenge for the past
few years. The Carter Administration's Justice_Department filed a
federal suit challenging the present districts of the state senate but
withdrew the suit after the Supreme_Court's 1980 Mobile
opinion, which now requires black plaintiffs to show that voting
practices have both the effect and purpose of
racial discrimination.
          A plan submitted to Justice under the present Voting_Rights_Act's
Section_5, however, requires the state or local government to prove
that the plan does not have the purpose or effect
of racial discrimination.
          
            Tennessee
          
          Tennessee is the only Southern state which has passed redistricting
plans that aren't facing serious-legal challenges. Not covered by the
preclearance provisions of the Voting_Rights_Act, Tennessee also has
had the advantage of adding a congressional seat to its delegation
instead of fighting to determine who must be eliminated.
          Early forecasts had warned that U.S. Rep. Harold Ford of Memphis,
one of only two black congressmen in the South, would be gerrymandered
out of his strongest support in western Tennessee. The fears proved
unfounded, and Ford apparently is now assured of reelection.
          
            Texas
          
          After months of almost daily developments, two separate federal
courts in Texas have issued orders establishing the boundaries of both
congressional seats and the state's general assembly for the 1982
elections. While the orders are under appeal, they bring into focus
disputes that have involved lawyers, politicians and judges throughout
the state.
          In the last few months a scorecard on Texas reapportionment has
required two or three sheets just to list the major players: the
Democratic legislative leadership, the governor, a handful of state
officials on the legislative redistricting board, a couple of state
court judges, six federal_court judges, Hispanic and black civil
rights groups, and a couple of dozen lawyers representing all
sides.
          Despite such a large cast in what the usually well-modulated editor
of the Texas Government Newsletter calls "arcane legal machinations
and Byzantine maneuverings," Texas redistricting has evolved around
the three major issues of reapportionment. Will Republicans or
Democrats gain? Will incumbents protect their own offices? And will
racial minorities get a fair chance to elect representatives of their
own choosing? Nobody has won all or lost everything but, if the
court-ordered plans remain, blacks and Hispanics will probably have
lost most.
          Before the reapportionment last year, Hispanic leaders had maps
showing how a congressional district with a majority Hispanic
population should be drawn in southwest Texas because of increased
population. The general assembly balked, and no such plan was
included. While Justice found the congressional plan in violation of
the Voting_Rights_Act and, more recently, a federal_court in Austin
has drawn a new congressional plan, the majority Hispanic district is
still nowhere on the maps.
          The state legislative plans drawn by a Dallas three-judge panel do
improve the voting strength of Hispanics 

around San Antonio and El
Paso but fail to avoid diluting black and Hispanic voting strength in
the urban areas. The plan is "temporary" since the state legislature
will have to try again in 1983 to adopt its own plans that meet
constitutional muster.
          Federal court intervention was required largely by the upcoming May
1 primary in Texas. In order for candidates to register and run for
office they had to know what districts would be lawful.
          While reapportionment will now be decided in the federal_courts,
the May 1 primary remains an uncertainty in the face of appeals and
further challenges to the orders of the three-judge panels. More
developments are expected daily.
          
            Virginia
          
          In mid-March the fifth redistricting plan drawn by the Virginia
House of Delegates was rejected by the Justice_Department in a
decision which prompted the 

Democratic leader of the statehouse to
advise the feds to "stick it up their ear." Civil rights lawyers
immediately filed a motion asking that the federal_court in Richmond
take over the job of redistricting the state legislature.
          In its March objection Justice found that the legislature diluted
black voting strength in rural southeastern Virginia, Newport News,
and Norfolk. In the rural areas the legislature divided black
communities in order to assure that only one candidate would be
elected by blacks in areas where at least three majority black
districts could be created. In Norfolk Justice disapproved of the only
remaining multi-member district in the Virginia plan. Justice found
that the multimember districts subsumed black_voters in a larger
district where candidates who won would always be the choice of the
white majority.
          The ruling was a victory for the ACLU, NAACP, and the SCLC, which
had challenged the Virginia legislature at every step in court and
before Justice. NAACP leader Jack Gravely called upon the legislature
to end the "spectacle and waste of the taxpayers' money." Judy
Goldberg of the ACLU said, "Let the courts do it."
          The federal_court in Richmond found the first plan adopted by the
legislature as unconstitutional in violation of the "one person - one
vote" constitutional theory. The Justice_Department also objected to
the plan. Another plan was vetoed by then-Gov. John Dalton.
          Four blacks presently sit in the Virginia House of Delegates from
majority black_districts. ACLU Director Chan Kendrick says that number
can be more than doubled if the federal_court adopts the plan which
his group has drawn.
          
            This report was prepared by the staff of the Southern
Regional Council.
          
        
