Not Hollinger's plan
Your editorial, "Race in the county" (Oct. 10), pertaining to the "Hollinger plan" of redistricting, was not only inaccurate but grossly unfair. The legislative redistricting plan in question was developed by a subcommittee of the House delegation. Sen. Paula Hollinger is a member of the state Senate and not a member of the House delegation. To call the proposal the "Hollinger plan" is unjust and incorrect.
The Baltimore County House Delegation Subcommittee, when developing the current redistricting plan, had to be mindful of several aspects. It was the attorney general's opinion that we were required to develop a single-member minority subdistrict. In developing this subdistrict, we had to look at the location of the minority population and how it best fitted into a legislative district.
The guideline was to establish a population of 101,733, plus or minus 5 percent, for each legislative district. The 10th Legislative District was over-populated by approximately 15,000. The population for the 9th and 11th districts was below the 101,733 figure by approximately 10,000, and the 12th District population was also below guidelines, by approximately 6,000.
Legislative District 5B, a single-member district, is to be abolished and absorbed into the new single-member district and into Districts 10, 11 and 12. With the above numbers and facts in mind, the subcommittee devised what was thought to be the best plan for that area of Baltimore County.
What must be remembered is that the House plan is only a concept which now moves on to the county Senate delegation. The Senate delegation is also developing its own concept of how Baltimore County should be redistricted. Both plans, from the House and the Senate, will be worked on in a House and Senate committee. If an agreement can be reached, then the plan approved by both delegations will move on to the governor's advisory committee. At this point, that committee can either accept the legislative plan or develop its own plan. The committee's proposal will then be forwarded to the governor, who will either accept the plan or devise one of his own.
In the time between now and the 45th day of the 1992 session, a great deal of lobbying and debating will take place before a final plan is accepted. When all is said and done, it will either be the governor's plan or the legislative plan that will be adopted, not a "Hollinger plan."
E. Farrell Maddox
The writer, who serves the 6th District in the House of Delegates, C is chairman of the Baltimore County delegation. Senator 8 Hollinger addresses the issue below.
Reflections on the Thomas hearings
If the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas were not laughable enough, the Senate's investigation into the sexual harassment charges against Thomas certainly delighted national audiences. But what began as a little bit of harmless fun took a dark turn toward gruesomeness, and no one should be laughing now.
The proceedings evolved from a mockery into a "muckery." Talk about harassment? The public invasion of the privacy rights of these two individuals, and the voyeuristic intrigue which prevailed approached a level of harassment in itself.
While it was necessary that, as witnesses, Thomas and his accuser, Anita Hill, endure intimate and often degrading questioning, it should respectfully have taken place behind closed doors. Instead, a public slopfest took place which brought irrevocable disgrace to Thomas and Hill, demeaned the proper mission of the congressional committee and shoul ... cause aching embarrassment to every gaping spectator.
Jaye Mack Glyndon
The American people are in no mood to let bygones be bygones with regard to the Thomas hearings. They will demand that integrity and dignity be restored to our constitutional processes. The essential first step toward this end must be an exhaustive investigation of "the leak" and full disclosure of the outcome.
The leak appears to be only the first salvo of a painstakingly contrived character assassination plot against Judge Thomas. A curious part of the scenario seems to be the progressive elaboration of the sexual details in the three Anita Hill reports ` from the first statement to the FBI (relatively modest even though here she had the most privacy) to the last (graphic in sickening detail even though at this time batteries of TV cameras were riveted on her).
This noticeable intensification raised serious motivational questions among viewers; and, as the gaps of logic widened in Professor Hill's testimony, it brought to mind Adolf Hitler's pernicious comment in "Mein Kampf": "The great masses of the people . . . will more easily fall victims to a big lie than a small one."
The majority of the American people ` male and female ` have concluded that the allegations and the whole plot were indeed a Big Lie, to which, however, they refused to fall victim.
H. J. Rizzo Baltimore