and expansions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and 1970, there ought to be, indeed, a “package” of extending and expanding our deinocracy in our today's, modern age, in the 1970s, by extending and expanding democracy and our democratic system, in our own evolutionary way of doing things, to include all of our Territories and Commonwealth, and with due specificities for the District of Columbia!

I participate here as a political science and legal professional, a graduate of Howard University, a political "activist,' as a private citizen, and of the memberships I hold in the organizations so cited in my statement, including the bibliography and references given therein.

Thanking you very kindly for the use of my statement and its inclusion in the records of your hearings. I am

Sincerely yours,

LEONARD S. BROWN, Jr.,

Esquire.

STATEMENT OF Leonard S. Brown, Jr., Esquire, In SupPORT OF ENACTMENT OF LEGISLATION BY THE CONGRESS GRANTING ("VOICE-AND-VOTE NOW") FULL, VOTING REPRESENTATION IN THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND SUCH OTHER AMERICAN TERRITORIES AND COMMONWEALTHS OF THE NATION:

Mr. Chairman and members of the House Subcommittee On Civil Rights and Constitutional Rights, Committee On The Judiciary, I am submitting this statement on Full, Voting Congressional Representation in the Congress for the District of Columbia and such other American Territories, commonwealths, and possessions really as a professional and private citizen (a socio-political-legal scientist). I am, of course, not representing any specific organization, although I hold memberships in, inter alia, the Disabled American Veterans organization, the NAACP, Washington Area Political Science Association, American Political Science Association, Western Political Science Association, Midwest Political Science Association, the Academy of Political Science, the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Southern Political Science Association, Southern Historical Association, Virginia Historical Society, American Historical Association, and such other groups. Moreover, I am permitted to practice law in both the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Virginia. My age is 44 years of growth.

I do not believe that H.J. Res. 280 (94th Congress, 1st Session) goes far enough. What ought to be proposed, to my way of full democracy and full democratie thinking, is full Congressional representatives in the Congress. Both the United States Senate and House of Representatives, for all territories and commonwealths, and possessions, of the United States, but with due specificity including the Seal of Government (SOG) and federal territory of the District of Columbia, which the latter has recently gained some, tidy bit of local Home Rule.

We have evolved far enough NOW in our evolutionary democratic system processes to include NOW and NOW bring into our democracy and democratic system, with full, voting democratic-representative participations, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the America Samoa, Guam, our U.SI Trust Territories, the projected Mariana Commonwealth, such other terri tories, commonwealths, and possessions, and, specifically, the District of Columbia! It must be noted that our democratic system has in it NOW several millions of so-called American “minorities," who are, at the sametime, full-blooded American citizens under our Constitution (Amendments V, XIII, XIV, and XV), the Civil Rights Acts of 1866, 1964, and 1970, the Voting Rights Acts of 1965 and 1970, and 42 USC, §§ 1981-2000 (1970 Edition) and are being denied otherwise full, American citizenship and participations in our federal government. Of course, there is "taxation without representation"! Many of our citizens are being denied full democracy in a more fuller, purer democratic system as we so evolve and move on in the spheres of modern days and times! Most of them are so-called "minorities" of America and its possessions-subjects of the USA, if you will! And specifically is this the case of the District of Columbia! Where there are some 750,000 persons, “a population larger than ten states that together have thirty-four votes in Congress" today! The District of Columbia, who, like some selected American territories, commonwealths, and possessions, has only recently gained a voiceless, non-voting delegate to the lower house of the national legislature. The District of Columbia citizens can now cast votes (and Electoral ballots) for the President and Vice President candidates (the Executive Branch of the national

government), but it cannot happen today in and with the Legislative Branch of the same government! [At this point, I wish to insert for inclusion in this statement and my participations in these hearings the statement I made before the House Committee On The Judiciary, 90th Congress, 1st Session, in the 1967 Hearings titled "D.C. Representation In Congress," at pp. 130-132, giving my specific views and observations on how the District of Columbia fares currently in the nation and in the Congress without full, voting representations in both houses of the Congress. I trust that the full statement as so inserted here will be printed here, at this point, in its entirety].

It must be noted at this juncture, that most all of the territories, commonwealths, and possessions of this great nation of ours participate in the local and state primaries and conventions, as well as the national party conventions, as voters and voting delegates, to designate and choose Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees of the several political parties, yet, save the District of Columbia today, cannot today, and NOW', participate in the Congress (in either house), with a "voice-and-vote NOW" when the Congress counts the Electoral College votes, or if the Congress had to choose both the President and Vice President, or the choice of the Vice President when and if that office becomes vacant between elections, or if it ever became necessary to impeach the President, Vice President, judges, or other federal officials.

Even in the Soviet Union today, and NOW, in a non-democratic system, all possessions, subcultures, minorities, nationalities, areas, territories, and autonomous/semi-autonomous republics and regions have full, voting representations in the Soviets and Supreme Soviet, albeit that the Soviets, Supreme Soviet, and the representatives all are "rubber stamps” and “rubber stampers." France gave full, "voicc-and-vote" representations in the France parliament to its territories, possessions, and departments, especially its colonies and formers of Africa and other liked areas of the world. The once Empire of Great Britain has its today, and NOW, Commonwealth of Nations, granting full representations to its former colonies (now independent nations within the Commonwealth of Nations), present Territories, and British Subjects. Why cannot our more democratic and more fuller, purer democratic nation become more evolutionarily democratic today, and NOW, grant full ("voice-and-vote NOW) representations in both houses of the Congress to all of our American territories, commonwealths, and possessions, and with a specificity for and regarding the District of Columbia-the capital city of the nation and the entire world! Should the latter be so undemocratic and suffer the pains of shortchanged democracy in a so-called democratic nation such as great as our is today, and NOW?

The Founding Fathers of this Nation, and the Framers of our own United States Constitution, intended that no area under the jurisdiction of the United States of America (in the years of our independence) be without and void of democratic, republican representations in the Congress of this United States of America! This was their raison d'etre for revolting against the English throne, colonial governors, declaring our INDEPENDENCE, and establishing a new democratic nation-to be further democratized and so modified from the so-called Articles of Confederation into the organic act we so live by today, and should amend accordingly, the United States Constitution. See, generally, Rexford G. Tugwell, Ph. D., Battle For Democracy (1935), and Ashmore, "Rexford Guy Tugwell: Man of Thought, Man of Action," III The Center Magazine 2-7 (No. 5, September/October, 1970). This is a publication of the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, P.O. Box 4068, Santa Barbara, California 92705. [Thẹ whole volume of the Center Magazine is devoted to the Constitution, its revisions and modifications, and suggested further modifications. See, generally, pp. 10–73, Idl.

Now, in both 1967 and 1971, I suggested the form of the new Article to the Amendinents of the United States Constitution that I thought the organic act ought to carry to implement my suggestions at those times with regard to representations in the Congress (in both houses-United States Senate and House of Representatives) for the District of Columbia solely, or singly. Since I have so modified my personal views since 1967 and 1971 on the extensions and expansions of full, voting representations in the Congress, to include all United States territories, commonwealths, possessions, and with specificity for and with the District of Columbia, I wish today, and NOW, to suggest a new Amendment form to accommodate and implement my modified suggestions herein [However, at this point, as with the insertions of my statement made in 1967 before the House

Committee On The Judiciary and referred to supra, I want to insert in its entirety my statement made before Subcommittee No. 1, Committee On The Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, 92d Congress, 1st Session, in Hearings Titled "Voting Representation In Congress For The District of Columbia" at pp. 336-340].

My new suggested Amendment would read as follows:

ARTICLE

Section 1. The people of the District of Columbia (constituting the seat of government of the United States of America), the Virgin Islands, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the America Samca, Guam, Mariana Commonwealth, and such other Territories, Commonwealth, and Possessions of the United States of America as so determined shall elect two Senators and the number of Representatives in the United States House of Representatives to which they would be so entitled to if they were States.

Section 2. Each Senator or Representative so elected shall be a voting inhabitant of the District of Columbia, Commonwealth, Territory, or Possession from which he or she is so elected and shall possess the same qualifications as to age and citizenship and have the same rights, privileges, and obligations as a Senator or Representatives from a State.

Section 3. When vacancies happen in the representations of the District of Columbia, Territories, Commonwealths, and Possessions of the United States of America as so represented in the Congress, in either the Senate or House of Representatives, the people of the District of Columbia and the several Territories, Commonwealths, and Possessions represented in the Congress, shall fill such vacancies by special elections called for such purposes.

Section 4. For the purposes of electing a President and Vice President of the United States, the District of Columbia and the several Territories, Commonwealths, and Possessions so represented in the Congress shall be entitled to the number of electors in the Electoral College as if they were States and have representations in the Congress.

Section 5. The rules of apportionment for representation in the House of Representatives, as contained in Article XIV of this organic aci, arc so modified for the enforcement and implementation of this Article.

Section 6. The Congress shall have the powers to enforce this article by appro-priate legislation.

I cannot over-emphasize, nor really understate, my point of view that I am of the firm belief that if we are extending and expanding our democracy to all of our citizens, including our so-called "minorities" in such acts of Congress as the Voting Rights Acts of 1965 and 1970, and the Extensions and Expansions of these Voting Rights Acts in such legislation as H.R. 6219 (94th Congress, 1st Session), in rather timely and current discussion anew of abolishing the Electoral College and substituting for it a more democratic form of electing the President and Vice President by popular votes of the electorate, and in and by recent Congressional hearings upon the operations and implementations (really workings) of the Amendment XXV of the Constitution, then it only holds true that the democratic "package" ought and should include, imperatively, the extensions and expansions of our evolutionary, endemic democracy to all of our citizens by bringing all of them into the SYSTEM per se by fuil, voting representations in both houses of the Congress! This is only fair-and in a democratic system and native, endemic democracy such as ours, this is not asking too much of the system to bring all Americans into the SYSTEM! This includes all of our so-called, native "minorities" and subcultured nationalities. If the non-democratic system of the Soviet Union can do it and laugh at our democratic SYSTEM for not doing it, then which system is really democratic? Ours or theirs? All of our citizens should be represented in the Congress of the United States of America in both houses (the United States Senate and House of Representatives) by and with fall, voting ("Voice-and-Voting NOW) representations! The citizens of the District of Columbia should deserve some special treatment in this regards, being denied no representation at all onetime, semi-representation at another time, voiceless and voleless representation later, and being further handicapped by the provisions of the so-called Hatch Act now because many of the District of Columbia citizens are employees of both the local and federal governments. Let all of this be termed the "Compromise of 1975." Cf. The historic "Missouri Compromise" on the admission of states to the Union.

RECENT BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES

Angle, Martha, "Twin Resignations Spur New View of Succession," Washington STAR, February 26, p. 1D, Col. 3.

"Another Test for Electoral College," Washington STAR, May 25, 1975, p. A3, Col. 1.

Bayh, Birch, "For Direct Popular Election of the President," Letters To The Editor, Washington POST, June 20, 1975, p. A27, Col. 5.

Broder, David S., Hill Asked to Alter Means Of Presidential Succession," Washington POST, February 26, 1975, p. A3, Col. 1.

Brown, Leonard S., Jr., Esquire, "District of Columbia Congressional Representation in Congress," A Statement submitted to the Committee On The Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, Hearings Before The Committee On The Judiciary, 9th Congress, 1st Session, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1967.

"Voting Representation In Congress For The District of Columbia," A Statement submitted to Subcommittee No. 1, of the Committee On The Judiciary, House of Representatives, 92d Congress, 1st Session, Hearings, GPO, Washington, 1971.

"Extension and Expansion of the Voting Rights Act," A Statement submitted to Hearings Before The Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights of the Committee On The Judiciary, House of Representatives, 94th. Congress, 1st Session, Hearings, GPO, Washington, 1975.

Chaze, William L., "House Judiciary Extends Vote Act," Washington POST, May 3, 1975, p. ÁS, Col. 1.

Denniston, Lyle, "Electoral College Abolition Revived," Washington STAR, p. A9, Col. 7. [May 21, 1975.]

Dewar, Helen, "House Committee to Weigh Amendment on D.C. Voting," Washington, POST, March 4, 1975, p. C3, Col. 6.

"3 Senators, Fauntroy Press Votes for D.C. in Congress," Washington POST, May 7, 1975, p. B3, Col. 1.

"Move to Give D.C. Votes in Congress Snags In Committee," Washington POST, June 18, 1975, p. C2, Col. 1.

"Expanding the Right to Vote," Editorial, Washington POST, April 5, 1975, p. A10, Col. 1.

Halloran, Richard, "Mariana Plebiscite Favors Political Union With U.S.," New York Times, June 18, 1975, p. 1. Col. 1.

"Hispanics Backed In Voting Act Bill," Washington POST, p. A32, Col. 1. [April 24, 1975).

Martin, Philip L., Ph.D., "The Constitutionality of the Hatch Act: Second Class Citizenship For Public Employees," 6 The University of Toledo Law Review 78-109 (No. 1, Fall 1974).

Meyer, Lawrence, "Hispanics Backed On Voting Rights," Washington POST, March 6, 1975, p. A2, Col. 7.

"Voting Protection Backed For Spanish-Americans," Washington POST, April 9, 1975, p. A2, Col. 1.

"Hill Unit Expands '65 Vote Act," Washington POST, April 18, 1975, p. A21, col. 1.

"Panel Backs Voting Act Extension," Washington POST, April 19, 1975,

p. A2, Col. 1.

Noyes, Crosby S., "The 25th's Bizarre Test," Washington STAR, March 4, 1975, p. A8, Col. 4.

"Popular Votes," Congressional Report, Washington POST, May 22, 1975, p. A15, Col. 4.

"Protecting Voters," Editorial, New York TIMES, April 29, 1975, p. 32, Col. 3. Raspberry, William, "Expanding the Voting Rights Act," Washington POST, March 21, 1975, p. A27, Col. 1.

"Should Congress Extend The Voting Rights Act?," Editorial, Washington STAR, March 13, 1975, p. 14, col. 1.

Taaffe, William, "D.C.'s Hopes For A Senator Hit Legal Snag," Washington STAR, June 18, 1975, p. B3, Col. 1.

Tugwell, Rexford Guy, Ph.D., Battle For Democracy (1935).

"Voting Rights," Editorial, Washington POST, March 15, 1975, p. A14, Col. 1. U.S. Congress, "Voting Rights Act Extension," Report No. 94-196, 94th Congress, 1st Session, To Accompany H.R. 6219, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C., May 8, 1975.

House Joint Resolution No. 280 (94th Congress, 1st Session).

House Resolution No. 6219, 94th Congress, 1st Session.

APPENDIX 2

STATEMENT OF LEONARD S. BROWN, JR., MEMber, District OF COLUMBIA YOUNG DEMOCRATIC CLUBS AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA POLITICAL SCIENCE, ASSOCIATION

Mr. Chairman and members of the House Committee on the Judiciary I am submitting this statement on Congressional representation for the District of Columbia as a private citizen and as a social scientist, and not as a representative of the organizations in which I hold membership.

I support the adoption by Congress of a Constitutional amendment granting FULL Congressional representation (two Senators and Representatives) for our nation's capital city. I would go much further than the provisions of House Joint Resolution 396!

I am in favor of granting the nearly one million people of the District full participation in the electoral process for the selecting of our Presidents and Vice Presidents, as well as participation in any other Congressional processes which might affect the Presidency after election day and the subsequent counting of the Electoral votes, c.g., the counting of the Electoral votes themselves; House vote for the President; Senate vote for Vice President; House impeachment of the President: Senate trial of the President; Congressional confirmation of a Vice President in the event of a vacancy; Congressional action in the case of Presidential disability; the succession of the Speaker of the House and/or the President Pro Tempore of the Senate to the Presidency, etc.

While the House Committee on the Judiciary is conducting hearings on possible Congressional representation for the District, the Senate is simultaneously holding hearings on the Presidential Electoral College System. This occurrence might just be providence, because Congressional representation and complete participation in Presidential electoral politics for the District are the most crucial Constitutional problems facing the Congress and the nation today-in our "democratic way of life." The District of Columbia can only have full, complete participation in the Electoral Presidential choice process as the direct results of the District's actual representation in the Congress. Today, as the results of the Constitutional provisions in Articles I and II and Amendments 12, 23, and 25, there are very serious Constitutional defects in regard to the District and the Presidency. These defects ought to be corrected by Congressional action before the 1968 Presidential election and before someone takes the matteri nto the Federal courts.

The following are truisms today: (1) Under Amendment 23, the District is permitted to participate in the choice of Presidential Electors, and thus it is permitted to participate only partially in the Presidential Electoral process and cannot "go all the way" because it does not now have two Senators and Representatives in the Congress. Presently, the District cannot vote for and help choose a President if the election were thrown in the House and votes for the three leading candidates were taken according to the States. This would be the similar case if the Senate found it incumbent upon it to choose a Vice President while the Iouse was electing the President. The District would be responsible for the votes for the three leading candidates in the House vote (i.e., nominating), but the lack of Congressional representation in the Congress would not permit it to follow through the electoral process all the way.

(2) If under Article I of the Constitution, it became incumbent upon the House to impeach the President and the Senate to try the impeached President, the District could not participate, after having voted for the Chief Magistrate in the Presidential Electoral College System. The District does not today have the necessary Congressional representation for such participation..

(3) Under Article I, Section 2, of the Constitution, the national decennial consus is presently taken in the District for the other purposes other than the original purpose, i.c., for determining Congressional représentation in the House each ten years.

(4) Under Article XII, presently no District representation is present in and during the Joint Sessions of Congress for the counting of the Presidential Electoral votes and the subsequent Congressional certification that Presidents and Vice Presidents have been elected.

(5) Under the provisions of the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, providing for the assumption of the Presidency by the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore, respectively, in the absence of a Vice President, the District would not have had the occasion to participate beforehand in the choice of these