House Passes Comprehensive Civil Rights Bill (continued)

Half of the Senate Republicans, however, have consistently opposed cloture to end filibusters on civil rights issues and their Senate leader, Everett McKinley Dirksen (R Ill.), is firmly on record as opposed to the public accommodations section of the civil rights bill. Democratic leaders’ strategy in facing the anticipated Southern filibuster against HR 7152 has not been announced. Majority Leader Mike Mansfield (D Mont.) Feb. 10 indicated he would not initiate the civil rights fight until Senate action on the conference version of the comprehensive tax cut bill (HR 8363) is completed.

Adjournment Vote

A second but less serious break in the bipartisan coalition appeared late Saturday, Feb. 8, when Republicans, anxious to get out of Washington to attend Lincoln’s birthday party dinners in their home districts, resisted a Democratic move to adjourn until Monday, Feb. 10, rather than try to complete consideration of the bill that night. (An agreement had been made by Democratic and Republican leaders that consideration of the bill would be concluded by Feb. 8 if possible but definitely by Feb. 11.) On Celler’s motion that the House stop consideration of the bill for the night, a standing vote sustained him 175–154 and a teller vote, 169–159. McCulloch demanded a roll-call vote on actual adjournment. The adjournment motion carried, 220–175, with the Republicans unanimous in opposition and all but 11 Democrats voting in favor. The House adjourned at 10:07 p.m.

Provisions of Titles III through XI and highlights of House action on them are summarized below.

For provisions and highlights of House action on Titles I and II, see Weekly Report p. 251.

Title III—Public Facilities, Intervention in Civil Rights Suits. Upon written complaint of aggrieved individuals, permit Justice Department suits to secure desegregation of state or locally owned, operated or managed public facilities when the Attorney General certifies that the aggrieved persons are unable to initiate or maintain appropriate legal proceedings because of financial limitations or potential economic or other injury to themselves or their families.

Also, permit the Attorney General to intervene in already filed suits in the federal courts where persons have alleged deprivation of equal protection of the laws on account of race, color, religion or national origin. (This section was not limited to public facility cases.)

ACTION—By a 47–122 standing vote the House Feb. 6 rejected an amendment by Rep. Edwin E. Willis (D La.) to delete the entire section permitting the Attorney General to intervene in equal protection suits. Willis attacked the provision as "a real ‘lulu’ of a ‘sleeper’." Rep. John V. Lindsay (R N.Y.), however, said the Attorney General’s right to intervene was limited to cases based on equal protection because of race, color, religion or national origin. "The proposal begins as a compromise," he said, pointing out that the controversial Title III that was deleted from the 1957 civil rights bill would have allowed the Attorney General to instigate, as well as intervene in, civil rights suits and had not been limited to cases involving race, color, religion or national origin. Pleading the case for the intervention section, Celler said: "Why should not the Attorney General have the power of intervening in a case of a poor, lonely Negro who has been deprived of his constitutional rights, on the educational level, on the political level, on the housing level, on any level?"

The House also rejected, on a 131–156 teller vote, an amendment by Robert T. Ashmore (D S.C.) to apply to both parts of the title the jury trial provision of the 1957 Civil Rights Act. That provision gave defendants who refused to comply with court orders and were then subject to criminal contempt proceedings the right to request a jury trial if the sentence for contempt was imprisonment for 45 days or more or a fine of $300 or more. Ashmore argued that both the voting rights (Title I) and public accommodations (Title II) portions of the bill contained jury trial guarantees and that they ought logically to be applied to public facility or general equal protection cases as well. Jacob H. Gilbert (D N.Y.) replied that jury trial provisions were written into the public accommodations title because an essentially "new right" was being created, while Title III involved "the enforcement of existing constitutional rights." Also, he said, unlike Title II, defendants in actions under Title III would normally be public officials who have a sworn duty to uphold the Constitution. Celler said there was no constitutional right to a trial by jury in contempt proceedings and that it had been accorded in voting rights and public accommodations titles "as a matter of grace, not as a matter of right."

Title IV—Public Education. Require the U.S. Office of Education to report within two years on progress of school desegregation at all levels; authorize the Office to give technical and financial assistance, if requested, to local school systems in the process of desegregation, both through grants and loans; authorize the Attorney General to file suit for the desegregation of schools and colleges if he receives signed complaints and certifies that the aggrieved individuals are unable to initiate or maintain proper legal proceedings because of financial limitations or potential economic or other injury to themselves or their families.

ACTION—The House Feb. 6 accepted by voice vote an amendment by William C. Cramer (R Fla.) to make it clear that the desegregation to be fostered would not mean pupil assignment "to overcome racial imbalance." It rejected, also by voice vote, an amendment by Joe D. Waggonner Jr. (D La.) to delete all of the title except the desegregation study and report of the Commissioner of Education.

Title V—Civil Rights Commission. Extend the Commission on Civil Rights for four years and broaden its powers so that it may function as a national clearing house on civil rights information. Also give the Commission authority to investigate allegations that citizens "are unlawfully being accorded or denied the right to vote, or to have their votes properly counted" in any federal election "as a result of any patterns or practice of fraud or discrimination in the conduct of such election."

ACTION—By voice vote and without debate the House Feb. 6 agreed to an amendment by Byron G. Rogers (D Colo.), a Judiciary Committee member and one of the floor managers of the bill, to reduce from a permanent extension to four years (ending April 1, 1968) the life of the Commission. The impetus for the amendment reportedly came from the Justice Department. Republicans, who had argued in 1963 hearings for a permanent extension to ensure the Commission’s independence from the White House and Justice Department, offered no objections. Lack of GOP response was attributed to adverse publicity the Commission received when the Commission’s Utah advisory committee sent a questionnaire to college fraternities and sororities about their membership policies, as well as a developing feeling in Republican ranks that even a permanent extension of the Commission would not ensure its independence from the Executive.

By voice vote the House accepted a Willis amendment to prevent the Commission from investigating membership practices or the internal operations of fraternal organizations, fraternities, sororities, private clubs and religious organizations. First, however, Willis accepted substitute language suggested by George Meader (R Mich.) which struck "civic organizations" from the list of exempted groups.

Title VI—Federal Programs. Require each federal department or agency extending financial assistance to any program or activity through grants, loans or most kinds of contracts to take steps to prevent any program from excluding persons from benefits because of race, color or national origin. Agencies must first seek voluntary compliance, but if it is not forthcoming, may cut off federal funds to discriminatory programs. Such action shall be subject to judicial review on applications of persons, state or local governments whose funds are cut off.

ACTION—By a standing vote of 129–21 the House Feb. 7 adopted a Willis amendment, assented to by both Celler and McCulloch, to require federal agencies to give Congress at least 30 days’ notice before actually cutting off funds to a discriminatory program. Robert W. Kastenmeier (D Wis.) objected that the Willis amendment was "obviously an open invitation to every committee chairman from the South to call on the carpet every agency head or department head who has the temerity to file a report with him cutting out funds for any area in his state."

By voice vote the House accepted a Celler amendment specifically to exempt contracts of insurance or guarantee—Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., Federal Housing Administration insurance programs and the like—from the anti-discrimination requirements of the title. In debate, Celler also made it clear that the title did not cover any direct Government payments to individuals (Social Security, veterans’ benefits, etc.).