Mr. BAYH, from the Committee on the Judiciary, REPORT [Pursuant to S. Res. 235, 90th Cong., second sess.] Senate Resolution 235, agreed to March 15, 1968, authorized the Committee on the Judiciary, or any duly authorized subcommittee thereof, to examine, investigate, and make a complete study of any and all matters pertaining to constitutional amendments under sections 134(a) and 136 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, as amended, and in accordance with its jurisdictions specified by rule XXV of the Standing Rules of the Senate. Pursuant to section 3 of said resolution, the Standing Subcommittee on Constitutional Amendments of the Committee on the Judiciary reports its actions and findings and recommendations as follows: INTRODUCTION During the second session of the 90th Congress, the Subcommittee on Constitutional Amendments engaged in the following activities pursuant to Senate Resolution 235: THE 25TH AMENDMENT (PRESIDENTIAL INABILITY AND FILLING OF VACANCIES IN THE OFFICE OF VICE PRESIDENT) Although the 25th amendment became a part of the Constitution on February 10, 1967, when action by the legislature of the 38th State, Nevada, completed the ratification process, the subcommittee continues to receive inquiries regarding the legislative development of the amendment. To satisfy those inquiries a concise legislative history is included in this report. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Senate Joint Resolution 1, introduced by Senator Bayh and referred to the subcommittee on January 22, 1965, was identical to Senate Joint Resolution 139, which passed the Senate by a vote of 65 yeas to 0 nays in the second session of the 88th Congress. After a public hearing the resolution was reported favorably to the full cominittee on February 1, 1965. On February 10, 1965, the full committee reported the joint resolution to the Senate with amendment, together with the individual views of Senators Dirksen and Hruska (S. Rept. 66). Senate Joint Resolution 1 passed the Senate on February 19, 1965, by a vote of 72 yeas and 0 nays. The House passed House Joint Resolution 1, a similar resolution, on April 13, 1965, by a vote of 382 to 29 (Rept. No. 203). The language of House Joint Resolution 1, which dif fered slightly with the version passed by the Senate, was then substituted for the language of Senate Joint Resolution 1. Ón April 22, 1965, the Senate disagreed with the House amendment and requested a conference. Senators Bayh, Eastland, Ervin, Dirksen, and Hruska were appointed Senate conferees. Representatives Celler, Rogers of Colorado, Corman, McCulloch, and Poff were appointed April 28, 1965, as House conferees after the House insisted on its amendment and agreed to a conference. On June 30, 1965, the House by a voice vote agreed to the conference report. The Senate adopted the report by a vote of 69 yeas to 5 nays on July 6, 1965. Below is a chronological list of the ratifications by the States: The National Archives has received no information from the States of Georgia, North Dakota, or South Carolina. (The 25th amendment is reprinted in the appendix of this report.) ELECTORAL COLLEGE REFORM The purpose of Senate Joint Resolutions 2, 3, 6, 7, 12, 15, 21, 25, 55, 83, 84 and 86 was to alter the present system for the election of President and Vice President. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY These resolutions may be divided generally among the following basic plans: (1) Direct national election. (2) The proportional system. (4) Perfection of the present system. Direct election The resolutions introduced by Senator Bayh (S.J. Res. 2), Senator Dirksen (amendment No. 163 to S.J. Res. 2), Senator Smith (S.J. Res. 6), and Senator Burdick (S.J. Res. 15) advocated direct national election. Direct national election would effect the greatest change in the existing system. The electoral college and the electoral votes of the States would be totally abolished. Instead, the President would be eleted directly by nationwide popular vote. Senate Joint Resolution 2 proposed a direct national election. The candidate who received the greatest number of popular votes nationwide would become President, if such number was a plurality of at least 40 percent of the total number of votes cast in the nationwide vote. In the event that no candidate received such a plurality, then the Congress would provide by law for a runoff election to be held between the two pairs of persons joined as candidates for President and Vice President who received the highest number of votes. Amendment No. 163, introduced in the nature of a substitute to Senate Joint Resolution 2, proposed the same nationwide popular election as provided in Senate Joint Resolution 2. However this substitute provided for State ratification through State conventions rather than by State legislatures. The substitute also would auhorize Congress to provide by law for instances where a tie in the popular vote might occur. Senate Joint Resolution 6 called for a party nominating primary election, a runoff party primary if no candidate received a majority of the votes cast, a general election, and a runoff general election if no candidate received a majority of the votes cast. Senate Joint Resolution 15 provided for a direct election. Under this proposal any candidate who received a plurality of at least 40 percent of the popular vote cast nationwide would become President. In the event that no candidate received a plurality of at least 40 percent of the nationwide popular vote then the Congress would provide by law for a runoff election to be held between the two pairs of persons joined as candidates for President and Vice President who received the highest number of votes cast. Proportional method The resolutions introduced by Senator Smathers (S.J. Res. 3), Senator Holland (S.J. Res. 7), and Senator Sparkman (S.J. Res. 84) propose the use of the proportional method for electing the President and Vice President. The proportional method would retain the electoral votes of the States but would divide each State's electoral votes among the candidates in proportion to their share of the State's total popular vote. Senate Joint Resolution 3 provided for a proportional nominating primary as well as a proportional general election. In the nominating primary each State would have a nominating vote equal to its electoral vote. The nominating votes would be divided among the candidates in proportion to their share of the popular votes. Should no primary candidate receive a majority of these nominating votes, then a second primary election would be held between the two persons who received the greatest number of primary nominating votes. The general election process would also credit candidates with a proportionate share of the electoral vote. However, should no candidate receive at least 40 percent of the electoral votes, as proportionally divided, then the Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives, sitting in joint session, would choose the President from the persons having the two highest numbers of electoral votes. Senate Joint Resolution 84 provides that the electoral votes of each State shall be divided in proportion to the popular vote which each presidential candidate receives in that State. If no person should receive at least 40 percent of the total electoral vote, then the Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives, sitting in joint session, shall choose the person to be President from the two persons having the highest numbers of electoral votes. The district system Senate Joint Resolutions 12, 25, 55, and 86 propose a district system for the election of President and Vice President. Senate Joint Resolution 12 introduced by Senator Mundt, Senate Joint Resolution 25 introduced by Senator Scott, Senate Joint Resolution 55 introduced by Senator Cotton, and Senate Joint Resolution 86 introduced by Senator Gruening would retain the existing electoral vote concept. That is to say, each State would continue to be entitled to a number of electors representing the State's Senators and they would be selected by all the voters of the State, while the electors representing the State's members of the House of Representatives would be elected in single Member districts. Because there is some difference among the measures regarding the designation of these single Member districts, the appropriate provision in each resolution is set out below for clarity: Senate Joint Resolution 12 introduced by Senator Mundt: "District to be composed of compact and contiguous territory, containing as nearly as practicable the number of persons which entitled the State to one Representative in the Congress." Senate Joint Resolution 25 introduced by Senator Scott: "One electoral vote of each State for each such office shall be cast for the person who receives the greatest number of votes for that office given in such election within each district established within that State for the selection of a single Representative of that State in the House of Representatives." Senate Joint Resolution 55 introduced by Senator Cotton: “* * * and the electors to which a State is entitled by virtue of its Representatives shall be chosen by the people thereof within the same districts established for the purpose of choosing Representatives to the Congress." Senate Joint Resolution 86 introduced by Senator Gruening: "and one elector to be elected from each congressional district in the State." All of the resolutions would confer on Congress, in joint session, each individual voting separately, the power to choose a President-elect in any case where no person received a majority of the electoral vote. Perfecting the existing system Senate Joint Resolution 21 was designed to retain the existing electoral system, although it proposes certain perfecting features. Senate Joint Resolution 21, introduced by Senator McGee, would eliminate the individual presidential electors and allow the people in each State to vote directly for President. The electoral votes of each State would be awarded automatically to the candidate winning a plurality of its popular vote. Senate Joint Resolution 83, introduced by Senator Pell, provides solely for a method whereby the District of Columbia can participate in any presidential election thrown into the House of Representatives or any vice-presidential election thrown into the Senate. The subcommittee's hearings on these proposals were completed in the first session of the 90th Congress and were available in printed form for the use of Senators and Representatives. Although the subcommittee scheduled two executive meetings to discuss the electoral reform resolutions, no action was taken by the subcommittee. CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATION FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA The purpose of Senate Joint Resolutions 31 and 80 was to provide for representation in the Congress for the District of Columbia. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Senate Joint Resolution 31, introduced by Senator Dirksen, provides that the district constituting the seat of government of the United States shall be given voting representation in the Congress to such extent as the Congress determines. Senate Joint Resolution 80, introduced by Senator Bayh, provides that the district constituting the seat of government shall be entitled to one Representative and any additional Representatives or Senators up to the number the district would be entitled to if it were a State, if the Congress so provides by law. The subcommittee hearings on these proposals were completed in the first session of the 90th Congress and were available in printed. form for the use of Senators and Representatives. These proposals were discussed in executive session of the subcommittee but no action was taken. EQUAL RIGHTS FOR MEN AND WOMEN On March 13, 1967, Senate Joint Resolution 54 was introduced by Senator McCarthy (for himself and 59 other Senators). On October 2, 1968, the subcommittee ordered this joint resolution reported to the full committee, with a favorable recommendation. This proposal is designed to secure equal rights for men and women and would forbid denial or abridgement of equality of rights under the law on account of sex. Legislation along these lines has been before the Congress since adoption of the 19th amendment to the U.S. Constitution first prohibited denial of voting rights on account of sex. The pending resolution would complete the movement for legal equality for women. Like the 14th and 19th amendments, the prohibitions |