We wish it to be clear that in focusing on the Negro, we do not mean to imply any priority of need. It will not do to fight misery in the black ghetto and leave untouched the reality of injustice and deprivation elsewhere in our society. The first priority is order and justice for all Americans. In speaking of the Negro, we do not speak of "them." We speak of us-for the freedoms and opportunities of all Americans are diminished and imperiled when they are denied to some Americans. The tragic waste of human spirit and resources, the unrecoverable loss to the nation which this denial has already caused and continues to produce-no longer can be ignored or afforded. Two premises underlie the work of the Commission: That this nation cannot abide violence and disorder if it is to ensure the safety of its people and their progress in a free society. That it will deserve neither safety nor progress unless it can demonstrate the wisdom and the will to undertake decisive action against the root causes of racial disorder. This report is addressed to the institutions of government and to the conscience of the nation, but even more urgently, to the minds and hearts of each citizen. The responsibility for decisive action, never more clearly demanded in the history of our country, rests on all of us. We do not know whether the tide of racial disorder has begun to recede. We recognize as we must that the conditions underlying the disorders will not be obliterated before the end of this year or the end of the next and that so long as these conditions exist a potential for disorder remains. But we believe that the likelihood of disorder can be markedly lessened by an American commitment to confront those conditions and eliminate them--a commitment so clear that Negro citizens will know its truth and accept its goal. The most important step toward domestic peace is an act of will; this country can do for its people what it chooses to do. The pages that follow set forth our conclusions and the facts upon which they are based. Our plea for civil order and our recommendations for social and economic change are a call to national action. We are aware of the breadth and scope of those recommendations but they neither probe deeper nor demand more than the problems which call them forth. CHAPTER 17-RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NATIONAL ACTION INTRODUCTION The Commission has already addressed itself to the need for immediate action at the local level. Because the city is the focus of racial disorder, the immediate responsibility rests on community leaders and local institutions. Without responsive and representative local government, with effective processes of interracial communication within the city, and without alert, well-trained and adequately supported local police, national action-no matter how great its scalecannot be expected to provide a solution. Yet the disorders are not simply a problem of the racial ghetto or the city. As we have seen, they are symptoms of social ills that have become endemic in our society and now affect every American-black and white, businessman or factory worker, suburban, commuter or slum dweller. None of us can escape the consequences of the continuing economic and social decay of the central city and the closely related problem of rural poverty. The convergence of these conditions in the racial ghetto and the resulting discontent and disruption threatens democratic values fundamental to our progress as a free society. The essential fact is that neither existing conditions nor the garrison state offers acceptable alternatives for the future of this country. Only a greatly enlarged commitment to national action-compassionate, massive and sustained, backed by the will and resources of the most powerful and the richest nation on this earth-can shape a future that is compatible with the historic ideals of American society. It is this conviction that leads us, as a Commission on Civil Disorders, to comment on the shape and dimension of the action that must be taken at the national level. In this effort we have taken account of the work of scholars and experts on race relations, the urban condition and poverty. We have studied the reports and work of other commissions, of congressional committees and of many special task forces and groups both within the government and within the private sector. FINANCING THE COST The Commission has also examined the question of financing; there are grave difficulties but we do not regard them as insoluble. The nation has substantial financial resources-not enough to do everything some might wish, but enough to make an important start on reducing the social deficit, in spite of a war and in spite of current budget requirements. The key facts bearing on our ability to pay for the cost are the great productivity of the American economy, and a Federal revenue system which is highly responsive to economic growth. In combination, these produce truly astounding automatic increases in Federal budget receipts provided only that the national economy is kept fully employed, so that actual national income expands in line with its potential. These automatic increases-the "fiscal dividend"-from the Federal revenue system are currently over $14 billion under conditions of steady economic growth. The tax surcharge requested by the President would add about $19 billion to a total fiscal dividend of about $28.5 billion over a two-year period. While competing demands are certain to grow with every increase in federal revenues, so that hard choices are inevitable, these figures demonstrate the dimension of resources-apart from changes in tax rates-which this country can generate. FEDERAL PROGRAM COORDINATION The spectacle of Detroit and New Haven engulfed in civil turmoil despite a multitude of federally-aided programs raised basic questions as to whether the existing "delivery system" is adequate to the bold new purposes of national policy. Many who voiced these concerns overlooked the disparity between the size of the problems at which the programs are aimed and the level of funding provided by the Federal government. Yet there is little doubt that the system through which federal programs are translated into services to people is a major problem in itself. There are now over 400 grant programs operated by a broad range of federal agencies and channeled through a much larger array of semi-autonomous state and local government entities. Reflecting this complex scheme, federal programs often seem self-defeating and contradictory: field officials unable to make decisions on their own programs and unaware of related efforts; agencies unable or unwilling to work together; programs conceived and administered to achieve different and sometimes conflicting purposes. The new social development legislation has put great strain upon obsolescent machinery and administrative practices at all levels of government. It has loaded new work on federal departments. It has required a level of skill, a sense of urgency and a capacity for judgment never planned for or encouraged in departmental field offices. It has required planning and administrative capacity rarely seen in statehouses, county courthouses and city hall. Deficiencies in all of these areas have frustrated accomplishment of many of the important goals set by the President and the Congress. In recent years serious efforts have been made to improve program coordination. During the 1961-1965 period, almost 20 executive orders were issued for the coordination of federal programs involving intergovernmental administration. Some two dozen interagency committees have been established to coordinate two or more federal aid programs. Departments have been given responsibility to lead others in areas within their particular competence-OEO, in the poverty field; HUD in Model Cities. Yet, despite these and other efforts, the Federal Government has not yet been able to concert talent, funds and programs for concentrated impact in the field. Few agencies are able to put together a comprehensive package of related programs to meet priority needs. In short, there is a clear and compelling requirement for better coordination of federally funded programs, particularly those designed to benefit the residents of the inner city. If essential programs are to be preserved and expanded, this need must be met. THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS We do not claim competence to chart the details of programs within such complex and interrelated fields as employment, welfare, education and housing. We do believe it is essential to set forth goals and to recommend strategies to reach these goals. That is the aim of the pages that follow. They contain our sense of the critical priorities. We discuss and recommend programs not to commit each of us to specific parts of such programs but to illustrate the type and dimension of action needed. Much has been accomplished in recent years to formulate new directions for national policy and new channels for national energy. Resources devoted to social programs have been greatly increased in many areas. Hence, few of our program suggestions are entirely novel. In some form, many are already in effect. All this serves to underscore our basic conclusion: the need is not so much for the government to design new programs as it is for the nation to generate new will. Private enterprise, labor unions, the churches, the foundations, the universities-all our urban institutions-must deepen their involvement in the life of the city and their commitment to its revival and welfare. OBJECTIVES FOR NATIONAL ACTION Just as Lincoln, a century ago, put preservation of the Union above all else, so should we put creation of a true union-a single society and a single American identity as our major goal. Toward that goal, we propose the following objectives for national action : That we open all opportunities to those who are restricted by racial segregation and discrimination and eliminate all barriers to their choice of jobs, education and housing. That we remove the frustration of powerlessness among the disadvantaged by giving them the means to deal with the problems that affect their own lives and by increasing the capacity of our public and private institutions to respond to their problems. That we increase communication across racial lines to destroy stereotypes, to defeat polarization, distrust and hostility and to create common ground for efforts toward common goals of public order and social justice. There are those who oppose these aims as "rewarding the rioters." They are wrong. A great nation is not so easily intimidated. We propose these aims not to meet the needs of rioters or Negroes or, indeed, of any minority. We propose them to fulfill our pledge of equality and to meet the fundamental needs of a democratic and civilized society-domestic peace, social justice, and urban centers that are citadels of the human spirit. There are others who say that violence is necessary-that fear alone can prod the nation to act decisively on behalf of racial minorities. They too are wrong. Violence and disorder compound injustice; they must be ended and they will be ended. Our strategy is neither blind repression nor capitulation to lawlessness. Rather it is the affirmation of common possibilities, for all, within a single society. CONCLUSION One of the first witnesses to be invited to appear before this Commission was Dr. Kenneth B. Clark, a distinguished and perceptive scholar. Referring to the reports of earlier riot commissions, he said: I read that report . . . of the 1919 riot in Chicago, and it is as if I were reading the report of the investigating committee on the Harlem riot of '35, the report of the investigating committee on the Harlem riot of '43, the report of the McCone Commission on the Watts riot. I must again in candor say to you members of this Commission-it is a kind of Alice in Wonderland-with the same moving picture re-shown over and over. again, the same analysis, the same recommendations, and the same inaction. These words come to our minds as we conclude this Report. We have provided an honest beginning. We have learned much. But we have uncovered no startling truths, no unique insights, no simple solutions. The destruction and the bitterness of racial disorder, the harsh polemics of black revolt and white repression have been seen and heard before in this country. It is time now to end these things, time to end the destruction and the violence, not only in the streets of the ghetto but in the lives of people. It can be done if we will it to be done. Much is at stake-for all of us. REPORT OF THE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON THE CAUSES AND PREVENTION OF VIOLENCE INTRODUCTION This Commission was created by the President in June, 1968, to determine the causes of violence in the United States and to recommend methods of prevention. Last January we issued a Progress Report, stressing the enormous complexities involved in understanding this vexing and multi-faceted proble.n.' We noted that to understand violence, we had to study American society itself, past and present, and the traditions and institutions which accept or condemn, generate or reduce the various forms of violence in our society. We indicated, too, that rather than depending solely on our own knowledge and preconceptions, we had found it necessary to enlist the assistance of more than two hundred of the nation's leading scholars in criminology, psychology, history, political science, sociology, and law. We have now completed our study. We present the results in this Report. The full scope of our endeavor will be 1. The Progress Report is reproduced as Appendix 2 to this Report. |