Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Senate Size

Senate Size

Ratings: (0)|Views: 799|Likes:
Published by ahawkins8223

More info:

Published by: ahawkins8223 on Jan 06, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

01/06/2012

pdf

text

original

 
 
WAI-3037972v3
 
51 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20001.2113Telephone: +1.202.879.3939Facsimile: +1.202.626.1700
Michael A. Carvin: (202) 879-7643macarvin@JonesDay.com
MEMORANDUM
TO
:
Senator Dean SkelosSenator Michel Nozzolio
FROM
:
Michael A. Carvin
DATE
:
January 5, 2012
RE
:
Senate SizeYou have inquired about the best method for apportioning the New York Senate. InMarch of 2002, I advised the Senate that the best method for determining the Senate size was themethodology referenced in that memo. (Attachment 1) I continue to believe that thismethodology is most faithful to the Constitution. I note that if the 2002 methodology is againemployed, the size of the New York Senate will be increased to 63 Senators.In this regard, I have reviewed Committee testimony offered by Mr. Todd Breitbart. Asan initial matter, Mr. Breitbart’s testimony confirms that the methodology used in 2002 is legallycorrect, as was already established by the fact that, during last-decade’s contentious litigation, noparty or court alleged or found any problem with this methodology. Mr. Breitbart himself candidly concedes that the “legal argument in Mr. Carvin’s March 7, 2002 memorandum isreasonable, and it entails no intrinsic partisan bias.” Testimony, p. 7.Mr. Breitbart, however, contends that utilization of the same 2002 methodology in 2010would produce 62, not 63, Senate seats. He is mistaken. The attached tables show that utilizingthe 2002 methodology produces 63 Senate seats in 2012. (Attachment 2)Mr. Breitbart’s error is his incorrect assumption that the “Full Ratio” analysis forRichmond and Suffolk should be done by breaking apart the two counties’ populations forcalculation purposes. If this is done, as Mr. Breitbart’s Table G-1 reflects, this provides a ratioof 4 for these two counties, constituting a net increase of 3 Senate districts from 1894.
 Id.
at 15.The proper methodology, however, is to combine Richmond and Suffolk’s populations for fullratio calculation purposes, as has been done in every redistricting and which reflects the Senatearrangements as they existed in 1894 (“District 1”). This proper calculation, as reflected in Mr.Breitbart’s Table F-1 (
id.
), demonstrates that Richmond and Suffolk have a combined full ratioof 5, with a net increase of 4 from 1894. Mr. Breitbart’s error in ascribing only three additional
 
- 2 -
WAI-3037972v3
 districts to Richmond and Suffolk, rather than the correct 4, is the reason that he underestimatesthe Senate size for 2012 by one seat, when the 2002 methodology is applied.I hope this is responsive. I would, of course, be happy to discuss this further.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->