OCR Text |
Show pros and Cons on Proposed Constitutional Amendment on Legislative Reapportionment favoring Reapportionment Amendment Against Reapportionment Legislation I Q A , j f. ' r if S This November, the voters of j Utah will cast their ballots as to whether or not the state aonsti- j tution shall be altered to set up a new system of distributing the seats in the State Senate. If the people vote in favor of the poposed amendment setting up this new method of allocation, they have voted the state into a one-way street. There will be no turning back. Briefly, the proposal would give each county in Utah, regardless of population, one state senator. It would give the state a Senate representation based on area rather rath-er than population and it would add an entirely new flavor to the state's legislative machinery. Backers of this amendment say it would put the state legislature on the same "principle of government' govern-ment' theory as the national government. gov-ernment. They point out that the Federal system has been very successful. suc-cessful. But would it work as well in Utah? - .... -, A WWW throw control of all state appointive appoin-tive officers into the hands of 15 senators (representing 9 per cent of the total population). Area, say backers of the amendment, amend-ment, must be represented. Let's look. San Juan, Millard and Tooele Counties, area-wise, are Utah's three largest (1,270,297 assessed acres). Salt Lake, Weber and Utah are the largest population wise (yet still have 1,225,467 assessed acres). Assessed valuation of the area-large area-large counties is $35,770,264. They pay taxes .on that much. Assessed valuation of the three population-large population-large counties is $691,959,381. They pay 50 per cent of the taxes. Yet, would they get equal representation representa-tion with the area-large counties? Somehow, one remembers the "philosophy of our federal government", govern-ment", one remebers that the battle bat-tle cry which sent our ancesters into action to set up that government govern-ment was "No taxation without representation." - t is based on substantial and respectable res-pectable precedent. Hounded on the Principle of Representative Government One of the vital points of strength of the United State gov- j ernment is the fact that it is a representative republic and not a true democracy. Our National Congress Con-gress is composed of a senate, with its senators elected from each state for a period of 6 years each, and a house of representatives, representa-tives, each representative being elected for a period of 2 years, and the number being based upon population. The senate is purposely purpose-ly constituted as a conserative body being not amendable to the immediate will of the people, and having responsibilities primarily related to such a conservative character. The house is set up purposely to be more responsive to the will of the people. Thus, there is brought into the legislative process pro-cess the principle of check and balance which can only be achieved achiev-ed in that manner, and the people thereby are protected against the potential tyranny of a temporary majority. Likewise, the people numerically are given equal representation rep-resentation through the house of representatives, while the states individually, irrespective of population, popu-lation, are guaranteed equal rep- N tutor's N',,x rbei fing ,' . ,vero smmilttod by polit- i I'lwlors well i'qimliitel with ' nroposi'd leslslaUon and are (:" KJ publisli.Ml this week to give irvillt' HeniUl readers im op-' op-' 'l"iuiiit V to rend arguments both fcN I"' .n,i apiinst the proposed c.on-t1 c.on-t1 'litionai amendment on reap- What It I' p,siiant. to a resolution adopt-O adopt-O . L'ihe 1953 Legislature, Utah ' i: rf ,Js at the 1954 general election , vote either for or against a I11S5 1 to amend the Constitution ffhe' State of Utah. Such am-jLnt am-jLnt if adopted, would con-5 con-5 e each county of the state K wnatorial district and provide ; one senator for each county. : f would apportion the represen-"fives represen-"fives among the several coun-C; coun-C; of the state so as to bring - tieo date, on the basis of the V JL population, the apportion-t apportion-t of representatives to each T Sv VAed on the unit of ten r" Zusand or major fraction there- . for each additional representa-A representa-A ' 'e after the first one guaranteed uy the Constitution. Thus, the number of representatives from Salt Lake County would increase from 19 to 27, Utah County from 5 to 8, Weber County from 5 to 8 and Davis 1 to 3. The number of senators from Salt Lake County would, of course, be reduced from 7 to 1 and Weber County and Utah County would1 each lose 1 senator so that the net increase, in representation from each of the said counties would be 2. Under the proposed amendment, the senate sen-ate would consist of 29 senators and the house of representatives would comprise 75 representatives. Why Reapportionment Is Necessary The existing Constitution of the State requires that at each legislative legis-lative session following an enumeration enum-eration of the inhabitants of the state the legislature shall revise and adjust the apportionment for senators and representatives on the basis of such enumeration. Despite enumerations in 1940 and 1950 there has been no revision or adjustment of the apportionment apportion-ment since 1931. The successive legislatures have sincerely tried to WOrk mil" a CQHefonlnnvt. ASKS RUSS BREAK . . Sen. IVm, F. Knowland (R) of Cal., senate majority leader, reads telegram he sent Pres. Eisenhower advising end of diplomatic relations with Russia after Reds forced down U. S. patrol plane off Siberia. there in permitting a condition such as outlined above? Such a condition certainly has not operated operat-ed J.0 the detriment of the people First or an, tne poposea syw.em in Utah is not the same as the federal government. The federal system gives two senators from each state. They are elected at different times, for six year terms and so staggered so that no one election changes the complexion of more than one-third of the senate. sen-ate. That would not be the case in Utah. With a full half of the Senate Sen-ate elected every four years, the Senate balance would go in whichever which-ever way the dominant political winds happened to be blowing at that election. There would be no check and balance system as the U.S. has. Secondly, take the idea of the "theory of government' as expressed expres-sed in the U. S. Congress. A theory is fine, as long as it works in practice. The idea of two senators per state, and the House chosen by population ratio has worked in the U. S. Congress. Will it work in Utah? There are some pretty good reasons to believe it won't. First, no small minority (less than 10 per cent of the U. S. population) holds a veto power in the United States Senate. No small minority of the population (again less than 10 per cent) can produce a majority in the U. S. Senate. Yet, that will not be true in Utah. Senators representing the ten smallest counties in the state (population (pop-ulation 27,186, or 4 per cent of the state's population) can block any legislation (including constitutional consti-tutional amendments) which must be passed by a two-thirds majority of the Senate. Senators from the 15 smallest counties of the state (population 59,934 or 9 per cent of the state's people) could constitute a majority vote' in the Utah Senate if this amendment passes. Even if you leave out the "big three" counties Salt Lake, Weber We-ber and Utah counties) it takes only senators representing 31 per cent of the resultant population total to completely control the state senate. Take for instance the problem of Utah County. With a population of 81,000, under the new plan, it would be given one senator and 8 representatives. The 15 counties of the state whose combined population popula-tion is less than 60,000 would have 15 senators and 15 representatives. This would mean that Utah to the Federal Constitution. As an example, what would be the fate of the Colorado River Project before be-fore the Congress of the United States if, instead of two senators from each state, the states were represented in the senate solely on a population basis ? On a population pop-ulation basis it would require the senators from 10 Western states, exclusive of California, to equal the number of Senators frbm the State of California. Where could we look for the development of the vast natural resources of the Western States if the states were not adequaely represented in the senate ? Where can we look for adequate representation of the rapidly developing natural resources re-sources of the State of Utah, in the isolated areas of this state, unless such areas are adequately represented in the state legislature legisla-ture ? Without the danger of affirmative affirma-tive control by a minority, under the propose that the state senators sena-tors be apportioned purely on a population basis, as the house of representatives? If that is the desire, de-sire, why have two houses of the legislature? If both houses of the legislature were to be apportioned purely on a population basis it is apparent that 3 counties, namely, Salt Lake, Weber and Utah Counties Coun-ties could affirmatively control all legislation, and Salt Lake County alone could effectively block the passage of any constitutional consti-tutional amendment. Its Practical Effect Would Be Wholesome and Beneficial It has been alleged that the proposed amendment is urged by those who would pit the rural sections sec-tions of the state against the urban ur-ban areas. It should be borne in mind, however, that before this resolution was adopted by a vote of 45 to 11 in the House and 16 to 7 in the Senate a thorough study of other possibilities was made including surveys by the Utah Legislative Council, the Department De-partment of Political Science, University Un-iversity of Utah, and numerous proposals by members of the Legislature Leg-islature and private citizens. After the Legislature had rejected all of resentation through the senate. There is great similarity . in the relationship between the states and the federal government and between be-tween the counties and the states. If anything, the counties of the State of Utah are even more inviolate in-violate from change by the legislature legis-lature than are the states free from possible change on the part of the Congress (See Article XI, Section 3, Constitution of Utah). The Utah legislature did not establish es-tablish the boundaries of the counties; coun-ties; such boundaries were established estab-lished by the Constitution itself and the legislature has no power to change; such boundaries. In this connection the Supreme Court of Utah in the case of Summit County vs. Rich County, 63 Utah, 194, has held that any act of the legislature attempting to establish estab-lish a new or different line with respect to a county without regard to original intention of the Constitution Con-stitution is unconstitutional. Amendment IX, a part of the Bill of Rights, of the Constitution of the United States, specifically refers to the rights retained by the people, despite the enumeration enumera-tion of rights in the Constitution. The Constitution of the United States, Article V, provides that " . . .no State, without its consent, con-sent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate;" and in Article IV, Section 4, it is provided pro-vided that "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government . . ." The surest way to guarantee a republican form of government for the State of Utah, and to insure the exercise of the peoples rights in the manner man-ner intended by the founding fathers, fath-ers, is to pattern our state government gov-ernment after the form of government govern-ment set up for the United States of America. It Would Assure Adequate Representation and Protect Against Regional Control Some have mistakenly alleged that the proposed amendment would place control of the legislature legisla-ture in the hands of a minority of the population. Such a charge is utterly unfounded. The protection against such eventualitv lies in , uaoia ui representation, and a number of proposals have been submitted and . considered, but the constitutional amendment now pending is the first positive step which has been taken. The said proposed amendment amend-ment is a frank, fair, and just approach to a vital problem which should not go unsolved any longer in the interest of maintaining the legality of legislative actions. Based jon Sound Precedent The proposed amendment is patterned after the principles embraced em-braced within the United States Constitution, which provides for two senators from each state and one representative, regardless of population, and additional representatives repre-sentatives based entirely upon population. This is one of the foundation stones of our constitutional consti-tutional form of government, under which, through the years, the United States of America as a representative rep-resentative republic has prospered and its people have become enlightened en-lightened and made happy far beyond be-yond the anticipation of anyone living at the time this- government govern-ment was founded. This nation is the envy of the entire world. Many other governments have attempted attempt-ed to pattern after our form of government. Surely the State of Utah cannot err in following such a pattern in reference to legislative legisla-tive apportionment within the state. Furthermore, we have 5 states, namely Nevada, Idaho, Montana, New Jersey, and South Carolina, who have heretofore adopted, and are now operating under, a similar simi-lar constitutional provision. Further, Fur-ther, Arizona has a provision which requires that each county shall have two senators from each of its 14 counties. In addition, 5 other states have a constitutional provision requiring that each county coun-ty in the state shall have at least one senator. Also one of the states namely Michigan, in 1952 adopted a provision accomplishing a similar simi-lar purpose in principle by districting dis-tricting its 83 counties into 34 districts for the purpose of senatorial sen-atorial representation. Thus, it will readily be seen that the proposal pro-posal in question is not unique, extreme, or unusual, but that it (jounty citizens wouia De ouivoteu 15 to 1 in the Senate and 2 to 1 in the House. Yet backers of the plan say it follows the federal theory of giving the people the margin of representation in the House. Backers of the proposed amendment amend-ment claim that area needs representation. rep-resentation. That is an argument which is valid to a point. Certainly Cer-tainly the thinking people in the State of Utah have expressed very little opposition to the idea that law-makers of the little counties have control of the Senate and representatives of the more populous popu-lous counties hold the margin of power in the House. That sort of compromise has been proposed. It is workable. Yet the proposed amendment wants to throw the overwhelming control of one body (the Senate) into the rural hands (25 rural senators to 4 from Salt Lake, Weber, Utah and Davis), while telling the populous popu-lous areas they can have control of the House (46 of 75 seats to Salt Lake Davis, Utah and Weber.) We-ber.) The proposed amendment would since the Senate has to act on all appointments by the governor i these suggested solutions, three-fourths three-fourths of the House and two-thirds two-thirds of the Senate approved this resolution. This was accomplished after the proposition had been discussed dis-cussed and debated by Legislatures since 1941. It is also apparent that the State of Utah cannot simply be divided into two classes: rural and urban. There are some portions of some of the counties which may be classified either as rural or urban, ur-ban, but on the whole the activities and resources of the state are completely diversified from timber to uranium, from dairy cattle to poultry, from alfalfa to sugar beets, from steel processing to paper box manufacturing, from recreation to wild life. Under the existing apportionment, for example, ex-ample, one of the senators represents repre-sents all of the following counties: Sevier, Wayne, Piute, Garfield and Kane. This is a vast area of diversified diver-sified ' and rapidly developing resources. re-sources. It is apparent that one senator would have difficulty in familiarizing himself with all of the needs of the entire area so as to represent adequately all five counties. A senator from each county would be more fully prepared to know the needs of his county and to act in such a way as to protect pro-tect and advance the interests thereof and to insure the development develop-ment of that section of the state. The overall result thereof would be a wholesome, healthy, steady growth and development of the entire area of the State of Utah. the guarantee that members of the house of representatives shall be elected on the basis of population. popula-tion. No measure can be enacted therefore, without the approval of representatives of a majority of the population of the state. It is true that the amendment would make it possible for senators sena-tors representing a minority of the population to prevent the enactment enact-ment of legislation. However, this is likewise true of the states under the federal constitution. The following fol-lowing comparisons show the relative rela-tive operation of the Congress under un-der the Federal Constitution and the Utah Legislature under the proposed amendment: Under the Federal Constitution: 5 of the population of the U. S., represented by senators from 13 of the 48 states, could prevent the passage of a constitutional amendment. 18 of the population -of the U. S., represented by senators from 25 of the 48 states, could prevent the enactment of a law. Under the Proposed Amendment to the Utah Constitution: 4 of the population of Utah, represented by senators from 10 of the 29 counties, could prevent the adoption of the constitutional amendment. 8 of the population of Utah, represented by senators from 15 of the 29 counties, could prevent the passage of a law. Bearing in mind that affirmative affirma-tive legislation can never be enacted en-acted by representatives of a minority min-ority of the people under the proposed pro-posed amendment, what danger is |