1

2

3

4

5

6

2

(c) by inserting after the word "within" the words

"each of the several States"; and

(d) by adding at the end thereof the following new sentence: "For the purposes of this subsection, the term 'States' means the fifty States, Puerto Rico, the District

of Columbia, and the Virgin Islands.".

Senator BATH. The next witness is a double-headed combine. I suppose you can say they are the leading civil rights team in America. Clarence Mitchell and Joe Rauh, from the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.

Gentlemen, I want to compliment both of you. I think you are aware of my appreciation for the efforts you have made in this area. Please proceed.

TESTIMONY OF CLARENCE MITCHELL, CHAIRMAN, AND JOSEPH L. RAUH, JR., GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Mr. MITCHELL. The way I would like to proceed, Mr. Chairman, is first to present this prepared statement I have. At the conclusion, Mr. Rauh will make some informal comments, if that is agreeable with you.

Senator BATH. Very well.

Mr. MITCHELL. I would like your indulgence for a couple of moments to say something complimentary about you and the previous witness. I am doing it because, as I look around the room, there are not many Senators here but there are a number of interested people present who are persons doing the day-to-day work on civil rights.

Many of these people were not around at the time this issue was one which evoked passionate outbursts from the opposition. I think they ought to know that the reason agencies like the Civil Rights Commission are still alive and functioning is because of the kind of personal dedication that you have given.

It has not always been true in the history of this country that the State of Indiana was represented by a person in the Senate who had civil rights as a top priority. You have had that ever since you have been here. You continue to have it. I want everyone to know that this is a very valuable asset in the Government of the United States.

With respect to Mr. Panetta, I think it should be known that he was in the executive branch of Government, and because of his displeasure over the way civil rights laws were being implemented he resigned, went back to the State of California, and ran successfully for Congress.

However, as an elected official, he still remains true to the convictions he had when he was in the executive branch of Government. Again, I think we should call these things to the attention of the newer people who are on the Washington scene. We do not do this enough. I think there is some belief that convictions have cooled with regard to civil rights and that the armies which fought for these things have all disintegrated. I would say that is not true.

I think convictions remain the same. I think the people who believed in them are still around. They are in different functions and they surface only occasionally in situations such as this.

Senator BAYH. If you will yield for just a moment before you get started with your statement, Mr. Mitchell. I should say to you, Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Rauh, and others in the Leadership Conference, while I appreciate your references to me, I feel it is important for the record to show that the battles some of us here have fought have been really more than just battles to pursue personal convictions, although that certainly has been an important part of it. These battles have been fought because we know there are people like you and those you represent in our States who have not surrendered, and who have the kind of sensitivity necessary to support our American principles. I would hope that the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights will always remain as a conference for those who might otherwise be indifferent. It has been my observation that you have performed a tremendous function in standing always in the forefront, acting as a sentinel warning us of the danger that would come should we let our guard down.

I do not think too many members of this body would intentionally go along with some of the schemes of those who would have us turn our backs on the progress made so far and ignore what still needs to be done. Fortunately, they represent a very small minority of our American public. However, we in the Congress have become so busy and so consumed with other things; things which, when one thinks about it, pale in significance to that which you represent; that we sometimes forget what our priorities should be.

The important function you play is to remind us of the pleas, concerns, and indeed the rights of those Americans not in a position to treat with the critical problems facing us today.

That response was unnecessarily long but I want to say thank you. Mr. MITCHELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am chairman of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights. My beloved and always faithful companion here is the distinguished Joseph L. Rauh, who gives of his legal talents without any cost as general counsel of the Leadership Conference.

We thank you for giving us this opportunity to present the views of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights on S. 2300, a bill to extend the life of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

We wish we were able to tell you that there is no longer a need for this agency, but I think we all know there is a need; and we therefore hope it will be continued.

In addition, it has become very clear that it is not only blacks in this country who are the victims of discrimination. At the time we got the

Commission established I believe most people thought of it in terms of righting the wrongs which victimized the blacks of our country. However, we now know that women, the handicapped, the aged, and other minority groups, the Spanish-speaking, Asian-Americans, and so forth, are also victims of injustices.

The fact that we have a Commission which can bring these injustices to light and present them in ways we can do something about is great for the country. We are delighted the Commission is addressing itself to these matters.

We have been aware of these issues all along but many people were not. That is a very valuable addition to the Commission's function.

By the way, Mr. Chairman, if it is agreeable with you, I would like to have my entire statement inserted in the record.

Senator BAYH. Without objection it will be inserted at the appropriate point, Mr. Mitchell.

Mr. MITCHELL. We also feel that the fact that blacks and their plight brought about passage of the 1957 civil rights law, which established the Commission, gave a lot of credibility to the things many of us knew were happening in the way of discrimination. We presented those wrongs to Congress in hearings. However, there are always those who say that testifying is just self-serving and those offering such remarks are a bunch of agitators for coming up here telling us about these things.

In fact, I remember being out in the hall of the other building back in 1957 when a Senator threatened to have some of the witnesses indicted for perjury because they had given an account of what had been happening to them in the State where they lived.

What they said was the truth, but the Senator, I think in an effort to exercise some of his powers, said to the press-and that is why I feel free to mention it "We are going to indict some of these boys for perjury up here."

Of course, as we all know, that could not have happened but it had an intimidating effect.

I would say that we have a Commission which stands as a body gathering facts, and it is a tremendous asset.

You addressed some six specific questions which we have attempted to answer, Mr. Chairman. We were asked about the achievements of the Commission and what should be its objectives if extended.

We realize that some of the activities of the Commission are not the kinds of things you could put down on paper and measure in a tangible sense. However, we do say that the Commission has had an effect on all civil rights legislation passed from 1960 to date. If anyone studies the debates on each piece of civil rights legislation, he will see that the Commission's reports, testimony and recommendations are widely quoted to support positive positions supporting civil rights.

The research done by the Commission on the particular subject under consideration very often provided the convincing data needed to influence the course of legislation.

In some instances, it may be found that the information supplied by the Commission has likewise been presented by the Leadership Conference or its constituent organizations. But coming from an official source, it is granted a recognition of authenticity that is not given to other sources.

To use an analogy, meat with a Department of Agriculture stamp of approval is accepted as meeting certain standards, although the stamp in no way changes the quality of the meat. Congress, the courts and the public has accepted the findings of the Commission as findings of an official, disinterested Government agency and have reacted to them accordingly.

We cite two examples in our testimony of the Commission's influence. The first is the changeover from court-appointed voting referees provided for in the Civil Rights Act of 1960 to keeping Civil Service Commission-appointed voting examiners under the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

I will depart from my testimony momentarily only to say that in 1960 this gentleman sitting beside me said to the Congress that we are making a mistake. Mr. Rauh pointed out as a lawyer that we could not get the results we were seeking in protecting the right to vote if referees were appointed.

Unfortunately, there was not sufficient attention paid to what he said. However, when the Civil Rights Commission was established, and recommended as an official Government body, they got the information independently and came to the same conclusion he did.

We then got Congress behind the appointment of examiners as distinguished from referees. I cite that because it illustrates the point that responsible citizens like Mr. Rauh come forward with good commonsense recommendations but it helps tremendously to have an official Government body backing them up, and I am pointing out that this is what should be done.

The second instance deals with the protection to cover persons who are American Indians, Asian-Americans, Alaskan Natives, or people of Spanish heritage in the Voting Rights Act.

Another achievement of the Commission has been to alert the public to developments in the area of civil rights, both favorable and unfavorable.

I understand there is a black member of Congress who was advised that the Ku Klux Klan has cased his house and intended to put a cross in his yard and burn it.

Many people think the Klan is dead and they assume that that is something which is now behind us. However, there is a hard core of Klan activists as well as those who call themselves Nazis, and so forth, who are almost murderers in their activities.

It seems to me that the Commission, by calling attention to things of that sort, keeps the American public on the alert for the resurgence of the kind of bigotry which represents a sad chapter in our country's history.

The Commission's activities aid and encourage those who work faithfully for the protection of constitutional rights and induces those who may be timid to become involved and make a contribution.

If its life is extended, we trust the Commission will continue basically in the same types of activities in which it has engaged, for the struggle for all freedom is not yet won.

The second question you posed is whether the Commission's mandate to investigate and identify any possible civil rights violations has been achieved, thus making its extension unnecessary.

The short answer to that is that not all that the Commission has unearthed has been given redress. In addition to that, we are discovering there are geographical problems in our country which we did not know were there. It seems to me that extension of the life of the Commission, giving it an opportunity to present these things, may very well give us more redress.

As the blacks discovered they could use new legislation to improve their lot-women, Chicanos, Puerto Ricans, and other minorities, the poor, the aged and the handicapped-they began raising questions about denials of their rights, many of which are still unanswered.

I worked with the handicapped in 1967 on the implementation of section 504 of the legislation for the physically handicapped, and it is fantastic to listen to the objections that some people had toward implementing section 504, which were the same kinds of objections as to why they did not want blacks doing some things.

Senator BAYH. A remarkable consistency as to why you should not do things.

Mr. MITCHELL. That is right. However, those who suffer are not in a unique position. When you add up the problems of all those who had difficulties, it represents the majority of the population of the United States. We ought then to be able to win by sheer numbers if it were put to a vote. Senator BAYH. Some of the women in American would say you start out with a majority.

Mr. MITCHELL. That has been a valuable addition, the problems of women. Indeed, you and others were instrumental in getting the Senate to act on the problem of pregnancy with the amendment we are seeking to add to title VII.

As I understand it, Congressman Hawkins will be having a markup of that legislation over in the House on February 2.

It seems to me it greatly strengthens the base of the civil rights advocates when the women especially, who are resourceful and persistent, are part of the troops carrying on the struggle. That for us is a very practical thing in which we are engaged.

The third question is whether the Commission is not needed as its studies are simply duplicative of other agencies' work.

We take exception to that. We think the Commission's studies represent an objective way of looking at these reports. We feel if there is any duplication then people in other agencies should be required to stop the duplicating because, in many instances they do not want to give to the Commission the information that the Commission needs. Sometimes when they get it out it is not reported in a way which really gives the public a picture of the problem.

However, we would hope that the Commission would have priority in these matters and have the right to get any kind of information that is needed from agencies.

If there is any conflict, we would urge strongly that the function be transferred to the Civil Rights Commission.

Senator BAYH. If you would yield for just a moment. I do not want to be an alarmist, but I think a careful and accurate assessment of facts would disclose that we are going to face a significant degree of opposition. I think we are going to have the toughest battle we have ever had to extend the Civil Rights Commission since its inception.