Mr. R. BORDALLO. That would be again whatever the legislature establishes as the statute governing the creation of these districts. We haven't yet really come out and said how these districts ought to be created, and it was recommended by Mr. Speaker here that the legislature be given that discretion. Mr. CRALEY. I acknowledge this, but the point I'm getting to, I think that the chairman has said you have two general alternatives, either at large or by district. But now, defining the second alternative by district, do you provide for election of all the districts by all the people or just their respective districts? Mr. TAITANO. I think what you are asking is what the legislature will do in this coming session, and, of course, I can't say whether they will do that. I am in favor of what you are suggesting. Mr. CRALEY. What?-that if you broke down into districts, you would only vote Mr. TAITANO (continuing). For those people who come from your district and you must reside in that district. That is my personal feeling. But then I can't say what the final bill will be, naturally. Mr. R. BORDALLO. Then, of course, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Craley, with the guideline of adhering to the Supreme Court's decision on one man, one vote, so that will determine in greater measure just exactly how these districts would have to be organized. Mr. CRALEY. I'm not talking about the allocation of districts; I'm only talking about the fact that once you do devise the system of districts, do you then restrict the voter to vote only within his district or do you allow him to vote for all the candidates in all districts? Mr. TAITANO. I am personally for it. I don't know whether he is. Mr. O'BRIEN. Well, I think that we are agreed that the legislature should be permitted to elect its members by districts if it sees fit. As far as trying to tell the legislature what to do, I think that it is pretty difficult for us to go any further than the bill now expresses although I would just as soon, as a matter of orderly government, that you would have some provision that the man had to reside in the district, although we don't have it in Congress, so we are not offering ourselves as splendid examples. Mrs. REID. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. O'BRIEN. Yes. Mrs. REID. I certainly don't mean to imply that I don't trust the Legislature of Guam. I certainly realize you are closer to the people and closer to the situation than we are. But I would hope that when you consider this, that you would give very serious consideration to the one thought I presented before, that you would have 21 members and there would be 21 districts, so the man out in the country would have as much to say as, his vote is just as important, I think, as the person in the heavily populated area. Mr. SKUBITZ. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question? Mr. O'BRIEN. Yes. Mr. SKUBITZ. In your redistricting plan would it be possible that we might have seven districts and in one of them we could have six representatives, while in another two and in another one, one? Mr. TAITANO. When I mentioned that idea, I mentioned three from each district, just so that you will have equal representation, three times seven. Mr. SKUBITZ. Three from each district are selected, then would the people in that district vote for the three representatives? Mr. TAITANO. Yes. Mr. SKUBITZ. Or would the people from all seven Mr. TAITANO. No, vote just for the three candidates in your own district. I say if you divide Mr. SKUBITZ. In other words, three are running at large within the district? Mr. TAITANO. Similar to having the island divided into 21 and people in that particular district voting for the candidates in that district only. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. SKUBITZ. Yes. Mrs. REID. I just hope, Mr. Speaker, that you don't get so involved as the State of Illinois. Mr. O'BRIEN. As you have gathered, Mr. Speaker, a great many of us up here feel that we have been through the mill, and I don't think we are trying to tell you what to do. We are hoping that you will do a little better. Mr. TAITANO. I'm beginning to feel pretty lucky that I just represent Guam. Mr. O'BRIEN. Any further questions? Thank you very, very much, gentlemen. Thank you all for your testimony. Is there anyone else that wanted to testify who is here? The hearing stands adjourned and the subcommittee will meet tomorrow afternoon at 2 o'clock, when we are planning to go through the same thing, perhaps a little more difficult, with the Virgin Islands. (Whereupon, at 4 p.m., the hearing of the subcommittee was recessed to reconvene at 2 p.m., Wednesday, March 9, 1966.) H.R. 13294-A BILL TO AMEND THE ORGANIC ACT OF GUAM TO PROVIDE FOR THE ELECTION OF MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE OF GUAM BY DISTRICTS H.R. 13298-A BILL TO AMEND THE ORGANIC ACT OF GUAM IN ORDER TO AUTHORIZE THE LEGISLATURE THEREOF TO PROVIDE BY LAW FOR THE ELECTION OF ITS MEMBERS FROM ELECTION DISTRICTS TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 1966 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:40 a.m., in room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Leo W. O'Brien (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. O'BRIEN. We will now take up H.R. 13294 and H.R. 13298. These are to amend the Organic Act of Guam to provide for the election of the members of the Legislature of Guam by districts. Hearings were held March 8. The report from the Department of the Interior is favorable, if amended. Unless there is an objection, H.R. 13294 will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point, and it will be considered section by section, and it will be printed in the record. Are there any comments? It is a very brief bill. So, the Chair would suggest that the members offer amendments at any place that they desire. Mr. ASPINALL. I would like to have us brought up to date now as to what the hearings provided as to this bill, as to what the representatives from Guam stated, whether they were united and what they proposed. Were they in favor of what the Department has proposed? Dr. TAYLOR. This is very difficult to say because the department reports were not available when the delegation from Guam arrived to attend the hearing. They wanted an opportunity to redistrict, but whether they wanted to redistrict under the Craley bill or the O'Brien bill, they were not sure. The bills had been introduced so very recently that they had not had a chance to study them. In principle, they want to redistrict. Whether they would prefer the Craley bill or the O'Brien bill is pretty much of a tossup. I think that they would take either one of them, but they had not had an opportunity to see this letter of March 28 at that time. The letter referred to, dated March 28, 1966, from the Department of the Interior, follows:) Hon. WAYNE N. ASPINALL, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR MR. ASPINALL: This is in response to your request for the views of this Department on H.R. 13294, a bill "To amend the Organic Act of Guam to provide for the election of the members of the Legislature of Guam by districts," and H.R. 13298, a bill "To amend the Organic Act of Guam in order to authorize the legislature thereof to provide by law for the election of its members from election districts." We favor enactment of legislation that would permit the election of the members of the legislature of Guam by districts. We testified at hearings before the Territorial and Insular Affairs Subcommittee that we favored enactment of H.R. 13294. We request that the bills be amended as indicated in this report. Both bills amend section 10 of the Organic Act of Guam. Subsection (a) of H.R. 13294 continues the legislative power and authority of Guam in the legislature, which continues to be a single-house legislature. Subsection (b) of H.R. 13294 limits the size of the legislature to 21 members elected from legislative districts, said districting and apportioning of the legislature to be done under the laws of Guam, except that the districting and apportioning must follow the "one man-one vote" theory as decided by the Supreme Court. Subsection (c) of H.R. 13294 provides that the legislative elections shall be held on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November in even-numbered years. H.R. 13298 amends section 10 without rewriting it as was done by H.R. 13294. H.R. 13298 would continue the present at-large representation now used in Guam until such time as the Guam legislature should create districts. It would also add a provision to section 10 that would ensure that any districting by the legislature would require them to follow the "one man-one vote" doctrine. We believe that the people of Guam have achieved a degree of political development and of political maturity which warrants giving to their legislature the authority to provide for the apportionment of the legislature of Guam. Further, we believe that legislation such as these two bills is in complete accord with our assumed obligation to promote the political development of our territories and, ultimately, give to them a greater measure of self-government. We believe that the members of the legislature of Guam should be elected from legislative districts. Districting, we believe, is the solution to the one substantial problem that has been identified in connection with the election of members of the Guam legislature; namely, that under the present system a slight shift in the attitudes or reactions of the electorate can produce a very great and perhaps unwarranted shift in the membership of the legislature. It is possible under the present system for 51 percent of the voters to elect the entire legislature. Districting would reduce the likelihood of the entire legislature being turned out by a small swing in the electorate and would provide more adequately for representation of the minority. It is our view that the "one man-one vote" rule enunicated by the Supreme Court, which rule is not now applicable in the territories, should, in the future, be a measure of the propriety of territorial apportionment. The proviso with respect to the equal protection of the laws, as well as the condition that every voter in any district election shall be entitled to vote for the whole number of persons to be elected at that election, would implement and provide a method of enforcing— if the need should arise the Supreme Court's "one man-one vote" rule at such time as the system is changed. The enactment of a bill with these limitations would also guarantee appropriate representation to all geographic areas. The foregoing notwithstanding, we would note that in the course of the hearings on this legislation there was extended discussion of a variety of the foregoing points and we believe that the representatives of the government of Guam, while favoring the bill in principle, would prefer not to be limited to providing for legislative districts. Similarly, the discussion disclosed that certain other aspects of the bill were subject to differing interpretations. Therefore, with the hearings concluded and thus able |