The Civil Rights Bill

Senate and House committees began hearings this week on the President's civil rights bill, the first skirmish an arduous legislative battle that most likely will last through the torrid weeks of mid-summer and into the cool of autumn. At this point the future of the bill remains unclear, with the outcome contingent on several variables: the force and intelligence of the President's leadership; the strength of the Southern senators plotting to filibuster the bill to death; the attitude of the important moderate Southerners, both in and out of Congress; and the policies of the ever more militant Negro organizations.

The clearest positions are being taken--on the firing line--by the Administration and the Southern senators. The President, in his initial message on June 20, and the Attorney General, in testimony this week before the House Judiciary and Senate Commerce Committees, have vigorously defended the need for far-reaching legislation. Thus far they have indicated they will compromise on only one point in the omnibus bill, the controversial Title II section which would eliminate discrimination in privately-owned public accomodations 'substantially' involved in inter-state commerce.

The phrase "substantial" has caused a great deal of concern among legislators who fear its vagueness and unenforceability. Before the Senate Commerce Committee Monday Robert Kennedy indicated the Administration would accept a more precise definition of "substantial" involvement in inter-state commerce. This "definition" would probably be the setting of a certain cash volume of total business as the cut-off point for jurisdiction.

Thus traditionally battle lines are drawn: the Administration continues to insist on the equal accommodations provision of Title II, the Southern senators continue to promise a filibuster against the whole bill. Into this picture is injected a new element, the moderate Southerner, who is beginning to take a new look at the whole situation. These moderates are the businessmen who are achieving progressive integration in such cities more local political influence. The group also includes Congressmen from the old Confederacy who feel legislation is inevitable and are ready to vote for a fairly stiff civil rights bill, even if it endangers their political careers.

Advocates of a civil rights bill need the support of the businessmen in their communities and the votes of the Congressmen in the House and Senate if the present legislation is to pass in something approaching its current form. But here is the key point: Southern moderates, both in and out of Congress (especially in) will not be able to support a strong bill if increased Negro militancy makes it look as if they are capitulating to threats of violence. Their constituencies, softened slightly by the events of recent months, will harden into the old ways if thousands of Negroes besiege the Capitol this summer.

For this reason, the President pleaded with Negro leaders to ease the current tensions and cease massive public demonstrations. His appeal was immediately rejected, and this week Roy Wilkens, executive secretary of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) told his organization's national convention that leaders will "accelerate, accelerate, accelerate" the drive toward integration. He also promised marches on Washington this summer if the promised filibuster materializes.

It appears that Negro leaders might well destroy all hope for any sort of meaningful legislation by continuing massive public demonstrations this summer. No less a devoted advocate of civil rights than Rep. Emanuel Celler (D-N.Y.) chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said if there is violence in Washington this summer, "a number of votes may be lost to the cause."

We are in complete agreement with the aspirations of the Negro people and their leaders, and we praise the courage and fortitude they have shown thus far in their struggle for equal rights. At the same time, we feel it would be a gross mistake to prejudice the chances for a decent civil rights bill by besieging Washington.

Negroes can only cease their demonstrations, however, if the President continues to evince his complete devotion to their cause, and elicits pledges of support from the Southern moderate group likely to be alienated by the prospect of violence.

The President knows that demonstations in Washington this summer could destroy his legislation, an event which would only greatly intensify the existing racial tensions. But the only way for him to achieve the cessation of demonstrations is to personally press the Negroes' cause more forcefully, and to convince Negro leaders of the sincerity of the Southern moderates who hold the key to the situation.