Melvin Watt: “Mr. Chairman, the third point I want to address is this notion that we ought to, basically, dictate to States that they…”

“Mr. Chairman, the third point I want to address is this notion that we ought to, basically, dictate to States that they have referenda in their States, rather than deciding their State's policies through the regular legislative process. If we say we are going to provide a three-judge panel if they have a referendum, but we are not going to provide a three-judge panel if the State legislature meets and passes a law that is constitutionally suspect, then all we have done is we are going to give the States that have a preference for referenda some kind of deference. That ought not to be the case. There are States who do not submit issues of this kind, or any other kind, to State referenda. In North Carolina, we seldom have a statewide referendum on any issue. That is what we elect State representatives for, to go and make public policy, and we ought not give a referendum State any greater deference than we give the regular legislative body.”