est alike. The one vote of each State is controlled by a majority of the Members of that State in the House of Representatives. The vote of the majority of the States is necessary to elect. In case of a tie, the State has no vote. This method of election in the House has heretofore in the experience and history of our country been decisively discredited.

Inasmuch as the electoral vote does not and cannot accurately reflect popular votes, this requirement that a majority of the electoral votes is necessary to elect a President stands as a hindrance without merit, and as a threat to throw the election into the House of Representatives needlessly.

Under the proposed plan of election there would be no breaking of deadlocks in the House. There would be no deadlock in the election. Instead of letting any small group of individuals decide who would be President, the election would be left to the millions of people who in each State would by their votes divide their State's electoral votes according to their popular votes.

THE VOTING POWER OF THE STATES

House Joint Resolution No. 2 does not propose any change in the voting power of the States as now fixed by the Constitution.

Perhaps a brief review of the constitutional provisions in that respect may contribute to a better understanding of our electoral system. The Constitution in simple language clearly defines the voting power of the States.

Under section 2 of article XIV of the Constitution, Representatives are apportioned among the States "according to their respective numbers." This. of course. means in proportion to the population of each State.

Amendment XVII to the Constitution provides that the Senate shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, and that each Senator shall have one vote. This, of course, means that each Senator has a vote regardless of population or the size of the vote of the State.

Article II, section 1, paragraph 2, provides:

each State shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.

This means that each State has the same number of electoral votes as it has votes in Congress.

Amendment XII of the Constitution provides for the election of the President by the Presidential electors so selected.

These provisions, in substance, fix the voting power of each State in the Congress and also in electing a President.

The Constitution very properly defined the voting power of each State. In doing so it very substantially contributed to the stability of the Government and gave each State a definite assurance of its relation to the Federal Government, and that its voting rights could not be trespassed on by other States.

In the exercise of its voting power, each State is given a number of electoral votes in electing the President that corresponds to its votes in Congress. In substance, that means that each State is allotted electoral votes in the same number that it has Representatives in the

House of Representatives, and two, corresponding to its two Senators, regardless of the number of its population or voters.

The number of its Representatives is, in substance, in proportion to its population. Under that phase of the rule of apportionment every State has voting power in proportion to its population. The population of a State is fixed and determined by the census every 10 years, and leaves little doubt as to the just proportion of representation in Congress and in electoral votes to which each State is entitled.

It was recognized when the Constitution was written that there would be a variable proportion of the population as between the States as to how many would vote at any given time. History has verified that assumption.

Article I, section 2, of the Constitution, says:

Electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislature.

In this clause, the Constitution in effect says to each State: "You shall decide who your voters shall be. All the Constitution requires is that in qualifying voters for Federal officers you shall apply the same standards as you apply for the election of your own officials."

Outside of the amendments following the Civil War, the Constitution provides no other limitation on the State for fixing the qualifications of its voters.

The State was given electoral votes primarily in proportion to the number of its people, and it was left to the State by its own means to determine who its voters should be.

The fundamental duty of a citizen is to obey the laws of his country and support the Government, which includes payment of taxes and fighting for his country, if called upon to do so. A citizen is required to perform these duties regardless of whether or not he votes.

The privileges of the citizen are to enjoy the protection of the Government, the various freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, the right to apply to the courts for the redress of his injuries, etc. The right to these privileges is in no way dependent upon whether or not the inhabitant of the State be a voter or a nonvoter.

Therefore, in apportioning representation to the State in the Federal Government, the concern was the number of its people represented, which included all its inhabitants.

Alexander Hamilton, in the Federalist before the adoption of the Constitution, wrote:

It is not contended that the number of people in each State ought not to be the standard for regulating the proportion of those who are to represent the people of each State. It is a fundamental principle of the proposed Constitution that as the aggregate number of representatives allotted to the several States is to be determined by a Federal rule, founded on the aggregate number of inhabitants, so the right of choosing the allotted number in each State is to be exercised by such part of the inhabitants as the State itself may designate.

The qualifications on which the right of suffrage depend are not, perhaps, the same in any two States. In some of the States the difference is very material. In every State a certain proportion of inhabitants are deprived of this right by the Constitution of the State who will be included in the census by which the Federal Constitution apportions the Representatives.

The Constitution primarily gives the States equality of voting power on the basis of population, and not according to the number of votes at any particular election. The number who vote in any given State varies greatly at different elections according to the interest in

H. Repts., 81-1, vol. 5-22

The

est alike. The one vote of each State is controlled by a majority of the Members of that State in the House of Representatives. vote of the majority of the States is necessary to elect. In case of a tie, the State has no vote. This method of election in the House has heretofore in the experience and history of our country been decisively discredited.

Inasmuch as the electoral vote does not and cannot accurately reflect popular votes, this requirement that a majority of the electoral votes is necessary to elect a President stands as a hindrance without merit, and as a threat to throw the election into the House of Representatives needlessly.

Under the proposed plan of election there would be no breaking of deadlocks in the House. There would be no deadlock in the election. Instead of letting any small group of individuals decide who would be President, the election would be left to the millions of people who in each State would by their votes divide their State's electoral votes according to their popular votes.

THE VOTING POWER OF THE STATES

House Joint Resolution No. 2 does not propose any change in the voting power of the States as now fixed by the Constitution.

Perhaps a brief review of the constitutional provisions in that respect may contribute to a better understanding of our electoral system. The Constitution in simple language clearly defines the voting power of the States.

Under section 2 of article XIV of the Constitution, Representatives are apportioned among the States "according to their respective numbers." This. of course. means in proportion to the population of each State.

Amendment XVII to the Constitution provides that the Senate shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, and that each Senator shall have one vote. This, of course, means that each Senator has a vote regardless of population or the size of the vote of the State.

Article II, section 1, paragraph 2, provides:

each State shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.

This means that each State has the same number of electoral votes as it has votes in Congress.

Amendment XII of the Constitution provides for the election of the President by the Presidential electors so selected.

These provisions, in substance, fix the voting power of each State in the Congress and also in electing a President.

The Constitution very properly defined the voting power of each State. In doing so it very substantially contributed to the stability of the Government and gave each State a definite assurance of its relation to the Federal Government, and that its voting rights could not be trespassed on by other States.

In the exercise of its voting power, each State is given a number of electoral votes in electing the President that corresponds to its votes in Congress. In substance, that means that each State is allotted electoral votes in the same number that it has Representatives in the

House of Representatives, and two, corresponding to its two Senators, regardless of the number of its population or voters.

The number of its Representatives is, in substance, in proportion to its population. Under that phase of the rule of apportionment every State has voting power in proportion to its population. The population of a State is fixed and determined by the census every 10 years, and leaves little doubt as to the just proportion of representation in Congress and in electoral votes to which each State is entitled.

It was recognized when the Constitution was written that there would be a variable proportion of the population as between the States as to how many would vote at any given time. History has verified that assumption.

Article I, section 2, of the Constitution, says:

Electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislature.

In this clause, the Constitution in effect says to each State: "You shall decide who your voters shall be. All the Constitution requires is that in qualifying voters for Federal officers you shall apply the same standards as you apply for the election of your own officials."

Outside of the amendments following the Civil War, the Constitution provides no other limitation on the State for fixing the qualifications of its voters.

The State was given electoral votes primarily in proportion to the number of its people, and it was left to the State by its own means to determine who its voters should be.

The fundamental duty of a citizen is to obey the laws of his country and support the Government, which includes payment of taxes and fighting for his country, if called upon to do so. A citizen is required to perform these duties regardless of whether or not he votes.

The privileges of the citizen are to enjoy the protection of the Government, the various freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, the right to apply to the courts for the redress of his injuries, etc. The right to these privileges is in no way dependent upon whether or not the inhabitant of the State be a voter or a nonvoter.

Therefore, in apportioning representation to the State in the Federal Government, the concern was the number of its people represented, which included all its inhabitants.

Alexander Hamilton, in the Federalist before the adoption of the Constitution, wrote:

It is not contended that the number of people in each State ought not to be the standard for regulating the proportion of those who are to represent the people of each State. It is a fundamental principle of the proposed Constitution that as the aggregate number of representatives allotted to the several States is to be determined by a Federal rule, founded on the aggregate number of inhabitants, so the right of choosing the allotted number in each State is to be exercised by such part of the inhabitants as the State itself may designate.

The qualifications on which the right of suffrage depend are not, perhaps, the same in any two States. In some of the States the difference is very material. In every State a certain proportion of inhabitants are deprived of this right by the Constitution of the State who will be included in the census by which the Federal Constitution apportions the Representatives.

The Constitution primarily gives the States equality of voting power on the basis of population, and not according to the number of votes at any particular election. The number who vote in any given State varies greatly at different elections according to the interest in

H. Repts., 81-1, vol. 5- -22

the election, the number of issues and candidates involved, and the intensity of the political campaign and other reasons, local and national.

So the percentage of voters out of population per 100 varies greatly in different States and within the same State at different times. So, likewise, the number per 100 of population who vote in national elections varies between the States and between different elections.

In the election of 1940, on the average, 38 people out of every 100 in the Nation voted for President. In the recent election, according to the latest estimates of population, only 33 people out of every 100 voted for President. Based on these estimates, if the same proportion of the population had voted in 1948 as voted in 1940 there would have been six or seven million more votes in the 1948 election.

In the Presidential election of 1920, 27 people out of 100 voted in California; 43 people out of 100 in Indiana voted. Here were two States somewhat equal in population in which 16 more out of each 100 voted in one than in the other; 27 people in California represented 100 people, while 43 people in Indiana likewise represented 100 of its population.

In 1940 over 53 persons out of each 100 voted in Illinois, while less than 40 out of 100 voted in Michigan. In Michigan 19 electoral votes represented 2,085,925 popular votes. The same number of electoral votes in Illinois represented 2,859,160 popular votes, or over 769,000 more than the same number of electoral votes represented in Michigan. There was a great inequality between the votes of these States from a standpoint of the number of popular votes. There was equality of population as to the number of persons represented by the votes. These two States, like all others, had representation in the House of Representatives in proportion to their population and not in proportion to their voters.

The Constitution follows a logical course in giving the States voting power in the election of President on an equal basis with the voting power given the States in Congress.

THE TWO-VOTE ALLOTMENT REGARDLESS OF POPULATION

However, while the main apportionment of a State's voting power is in proportion to its population, there is another important modification of that rule. Each State is also given two electoral votes corresponding to its two Senators, regardless of population and regardless of the number of its voters. This provision was part of the compromise between the small and large States which is a basis on which the Constitution was finally adopted.

The allotment of two votes to each State, the same as the assignment of two Senators to each State, is one of the checks and balances that many students have assigned as contributing to the stability of our form of Government.

The Constitution provides that no State shall be deprived of its two Senators except by its own consent. That, of course, assures that there will be no change limiting the allotment of Senators to any State. The allotment of two electoral votes conforms generally to the allotment of two Senators to each State. It is almost equally impossible to deprive the smaller States of that present constitutional right, even if it were thought desirable.