00:00:07.550 - 00:00:38.150

100 on today's report from Washington. Senators Matters discusses domestic and foreign problems of interest to the people of Florida and the nation. Now here is the first question outside of this matters. I'd like to get your opinion right away on this so called Dirksen Mansfield reapportionment writer, which has been tacked on the foreign aid bill.

00:00:38.150 - 00:01:39.020

Would you completely tell us what that does? If I had enough time? I'd love to, but I might say very briefly that I support it. What this does actually is to give to the states and the state legislatures time to act under the Supreme Court's decision, with which I do not agree that the Supreme Court decision, which said that each person was entitled to one vote if we don't do that and what happens is we negate and nullify elections which have been held in some 15 states primary elections, and all the members of Congress and all the members of the Legislature have to run at large, and it makes the most confusing and chaotic situation now, so far as I'm concerned with respect to the major point of involved here, is whether or not we should have legislative bodies made up solely on strictly population.

00:01:39.020 - 00:02:29.230

One vote, one man. If we do, if we carry this decision to its logical conclusion, then we might as well do away with bicameral system of government. What do you mean by that? I mean, where you have a Senate where you have a lower house which Florida doesn't, which Florida does have in every state in the Union has, I think, except the state of Nebraska now, it has been the judgment throughout the years of most of the people that a better type of government would be to have a bicameral or two houses the Senate and the lower house, one of them based solely on population, the other based as is the federal system on the representation of counties or the states so that minority groups and small areas can be protected.

00:02:29.440 - 00:02:44.530

Now, this is what Jefferson thought was the better idea of government. This is what James Madison thought was the better idea of government. This is what Benjamin Franklin thought was the better idea of government. This is what everyone thought was the better idea of government, even even justice.

00:02:44.530 - 00:03:09.010

BRANDEIS, Justice, Cardoza and Justice Harlan in this recent court because they felt that if you have totally a unicameral type where it's just totally on population throughout and the minorities eventually will have no opportunity to be represented or have their voice in government, and it wouldn't be make for a better and more responsible government.

00:03:09.010 - 00:03:31.680

I totally agree with the article, which was written by Walter Lippmann, who my think is probably the most respected columnist that there is in the United States today, where he frankly gave his endorsement to the Dirksen proposal and then said that this is such a monumental change that the people of America need to have time to think about it.

00:03:31.680 - 00:03:47.260

It needs to be debated and in the original dark amendment, of which I'm a sponsor we provide. But first the people of any state can finally have what they want because they've got to vote on it. But we let them have a vote on that particular issue.

00:03:47.740 - 00:04:04.530

But we provide any that if they do not make a choice, then there will be one house which is completely based on population and the other house will have. The same concept is sort of the United States Senate, where there are two senators from every state.

00:04:04.670 - 00:04:23.780

Rhode Island has two senators. Florida has two senators, California has two senators and New York has two senators. Obviously, the New York people on a base of population do not have as much representation in the Senate as does the state of Rhode Island. But it was deemed by the Founding Fathers that this was the better approach.

00:04:23.780 - 00:04:37.350

They had just had experience under tyrannical government of Great Britain, and they didn't want it. And they wanted a system of checks and balances. So as far as I'm concerned, I'm telling some of my friends who write me that they can line themselves up if they want to.

00:04:38.340 - 00:04:58.550

With Earl Warren, the chief justice of the Supreme Court with Hugo Black, with Mr Douglas of the Supreme Court with Joe Clark, senator from Pennsylvania and some of the great levels. But as far as I'm concerned, I feel perfectly comfortable having adopted what I think of the principles of Jefferson, Madison and Franklin in this particular issue.

00:04:58.940 - 00:05:39.710

Thank you very much. Senator George Smathers. Well, Senator Smathers, I'd like to have you clarified the brother wide vote that the House passed this tuck bill on where they wiped out this ruling by the Supreme Court. Well, first, I think it's a complete demonstration that it's the Legislature, the legislative body of this government being three bodies the executive, the judicial and the legislative the legislative has felt ever since the advent of this so called Earl Warren court that the court Supreme Court of the United States is attempting to actually take over the functions of the Legislature.

00:05:40.440 - 00:06:05.870

Second, and there's a great resentment about that, and I think this vote reflected some of that resentment. Secondly, I think there's a recognition that the 14th Amendment, which the Supreme Court has used to bring about this so called one man, one vote that was an amendment which was passed in 1867 at the conclusion of the Civil War, totally calculated at that time to give equal rights, as that's what it says.

00:06:05.870 - 00:06:30.720

Equal rights and privileges to every citizen, regardless of race, color, creed. It was calculated to protect the Negro citizen, and that's all it was contended to do. Now the Supreme Court has taken that particular amendment to hang this theory to hang onto with his theory that it also means that the state Legislature should be based on a saw solidly population basis.

00:06:31.240 - 00:06:53.120

Nobody really agrees with that that I know of no good constitutional lawyer. So the lawyers over there, they voted against it on that. Thirdly, I think that they wanted to knock out the Supreme Court decision, probably in the realization that the Senate proposal that which we have a Dirksen and Mansfield have recommended, is a much more sensible and logical approach.

00:06:53.130 - 00:07:09.050

Because some people have pointed out, Actually, if we passed the law of this character while it might be effective for the next couple of months, when the Supreme Court did meet, the Supreme Court would immediately declare that particular act contrary to the Constitution on another matter.

00:07:09.440 - 00:07:28.800

Tomorrow, in most cases, as far as this broadcast is concerned, the Democratic National Convention will have started. I'd like to know whether or not you plan to be there. And what contribution did you make in the discussion before their platform committee? Well, I I first I plan to be there and what contribution I made.

00:07:28.800 - 00:07:44.910

As a matter of opinion, I'm sure some people with the opinion I made none. Uhh. Some of my friends are of the opinion. I made some contribution. What I did try to do, however, was to urge the platform committee to put into the platform a very strong plank.

00:07:44.910 - 00:08:07.050

Will respect to getting rid of Fidel Castro and communism in Cuba and to say that under no conditions are the Is the government of Cuba a a matter of discussion or is it negotiable? We're going to get rid of communism in Cuba. That was the first thing I recommended and then is the chairman of the Committee on Aging.

00:08:07.440 - 00:08:39.360

I. I think that it's enormously important that we have a platform in their recognizing that someone people every day getting to the 65 year old and older group. It's becoming an increasingly greater proportion of our population. The needs of these people are enormous. There are many things aside from medical care which can be done in addition to a sensible medical care program which ought to be done, and we, the Democratic Party, ought to take some recognition of it.

00:08:40.040 - 00:09:23.340

The third thing which I talked about was the importance of small business in our free enterprise system and how the Democratic Party had historically been a friend of small business. But, frankly, how small businesses suffering great challenge today in this concentration of chain stores, or whether they're drugstores, grocery stores or whatever they are, and that we need to do a great deal more with respect to preserving small business and thereby developing individuals who have individual self reliance who have self respect for themselves and who actually live, You might say in under the free enterprise system, in accordance with the free enterprise system, even more than those big business.

00:09:23.550 - 00:09:38.720

One final question. Senator, It indicates to me that we will have to when you come back from this convention, pass this Social Security measure. Now. Will they try to tie the Medicare Social Security approach to the Social Security increase? There's no question about it to do.

00:09:38.720 - 00:09:54.060

The question we're going to have to decide is whether or not first you, or whether some of them decide whether they can get medical care on the bill if they get medical care on the bill. Do they want medical care on the bill? In lieu of these increased social security payments, you can't have both.

00:09:54.540 - 00:10:08.250

If you don't get the King Anderson Bill, do you take the river cough Bill? These are matters which will be discussed at great length of the first week in which we come back from the convention. Thank you very much. Senator George Smathers. I return you now to your station announcer.