« PreviousContinue »
Enforcement and Administration:
EDITORS' NOTE: Congressman McClory (R., Ill.) offered an amendment that would have limited EEOC's jurisdiction to states that don't have laws dealing with discrimination in employment or are not, in the view of the President, adequately enforcing such laws. The amendment was defeated by a voice
My amendment would continue the States' authority, under their respective laws affecting fair employment, unless and until it is shown and the President has determined that a State, in question, either, first, does not have adequate laws on the subjects covered in the Federal law, or, second, is not adequately exercising its authority.
In the State of Illinois we have labored to create a workable and adequate law dealing with equal job opportunities. The Illinois law is working well and is receiving general support from both labor and management, as well as from the general public. The Federal Government should neither pre-empt this important function now being exercised by the Government of the State of Illinois, nor should the Federal Commission-created by H.R. 7152-be permitted to supersede the authority of the very able Illinois Fair Employment Practices Commission.
My amendment would grant further protection to the rights and prerogatives of our Illinois citizens and discourageif not prevent-exercise of Federal authority under title VII of H.R. 7152, unless and until the State of Illinois should fail or neglect to exercise its authority in this area. This same additional protection would redound to the benefit of the other 49 States.
I urge a favorable vote on this amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. MCCLORY). The amendment was rejected.
EDITORS' NOTE: Senator Clark (D., Pa.) pointed out that 28 states and some 48 cities have fair employment practices laws or ordinances. These, be noted, will continue to operate, except where inconsistent with Title VII.
Senate 4-8-64 p. 7205
I turn now to the need for a Federal Fair Employment Practices Act. It is true that in 28 States and a large number of cities-some 48 of them, I believe there are State fair employment practices legislation or ordinances. call attention to the map which appears behind the last row of chairs on the Democratic side of the aisle of the Senate to indicate where those States are.
Every single State east of the Mississippi and north of the Ohio, except Maine and New Hampshire, has fair employment practices legislation. West Virginia, Kansas, Oklahoma, Colorado, and New Mexico also have such legislation.
The three Pacific Coast States, in addition to Idaho and Nevada, have fair employment practices legislation.
Not a single State of the Old Confederacy has such a law. That is perhaps the most cogent argument in support of title VII. Roughly 60 percent of the nonwhite population lives in 22 States where there are no FEPC laws. More than that, State and local FEPC laws vary widely in effectiveness. In many areas effective enforcement is hampered by inadequate legislation, inadequate procedures, or an inadequate budget. Big interstate industry cannot effectively be handled by the States. Interstate commerce is the primary responsibility of the Federal Government.
Mr. President, the States which have the best FEPC laws are those which most articulately demand and request a Federal law to assist them. Five very able men testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Employment and Manpower, which held hearings; they are the men who administer the fair employment practices laws in New York, New Jersey, Missouri, Minnesota, and California. Those five men were unanimous in their support of a Federal fair employment practices legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a list of 15 Governors and representatives of Governors on record as supporting a Federal FEPC law, which
appears on page 287 of the Senate hearings, be printed in full in the RECORD at this point in my remarks.
There being no objection, the list was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
GOVERNORS AND REPRESENTATIVES OF GOVERNORS PARTICIPATING IN THIRD ANNUAL CONFERENCE
Hon. William G. Stratton, Governor, Illinois.
Hon. Herschel C. Loveless, Governor, Iowa. Roy Shapiro, State controller, Kansas. Kermit S. Nickerson, deputy commissioner of education, Maine.
Walter Carrington, Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, Massachusetts. Hon. G. Mennen Williams, Governor, Michigan.
Hon. Orville L. Freeman, Governor, Minnesota.
Milton Litvak, Missouri Human Rights Commission, Missouri.
Dr. John P. Milligan, assistant commissioner of education, New Jersey.
Elmer A. Carter, chairman, New York State Committee Against Discrimination, New
Frank W. Baldau, executive director, Ohio Civil Rights Committee, Ohio,
Normal O. Nilsen, commissioner of labor, Oregon.
Senator C. George DeStefano, Rhode Island.
Mark Litchman, Washington State representative, Washington.
Hon. Gaylord A. Nelson, Governor, Wisconsin.
Mr. CLARK. It is important to note that title VII is so drafted that the States and the Federal Government can work together. When the bill is enacted, the State and the municipal agencies will continue to operate, and State laws will continue in force, except where they are inconsistent with title VII. The Federal Commission can agree under title VII not to bring any suits in cases in a particular State or locality where the State or locality has adequate power under its own laws or ordinances to carry out the purposes of the act and it is effectively exercising that power.
In addition, the Federal Commission can make arrangements to use and pay for the services of State and local agencies in carrying out its duties under the Federal law if the State agencies are willing.
So, I take it that title VII meshes nicely, logically, and coherently with the State and city legislation already in existence in a number of the States and a number of our cities, small as well as large. The Federal Government and the State governments could cooperate effectively and, to some extent at least, there would be a saving in the Federal budget in those areas where State laws
pp. 1635, 1636
EDITORS' NOTE: Congressman Reid (R., N.Y.) placed in the record a table showing the disposition of complaints filed with the New York State Commission for Human Rights during the years 1945 through 1963.
Mr. REID of New York. Mr. Chairman, in this historic debate we must keep faith with the promise of our heritage.
We must make equality of opportunity and equal protection of the laws a present reality-not keep it a pious principle; nor a future hope.
Probable cause, specific complaint sustained:
Adjusted after conference and conciliation.. Ordered for hearing or consent order issued. No probable cause found as to specific complaint but other discriminatory practices or policies found and adjusted..
are effective, discrimination is outlawed, and discriminators are prosecuted.
No probable cause found, specific complaint dis-
Withdrawn by complaint..
Lack of jurisdiction, specific complaint dismissed..
But in wide areas of the country where there is no State or local law, a Federal law is essential. I take it that the economic and social background which I have attempted to summarize in my speech bears pertinent witness to the correctness of that statement.
Complaints filed with the New York State Commission for Human Rights, 1945-63
One of the cornerstones of this bill is the FEPC title. It goes to the heart, Mr. Chairman, of human dignity and selfrespect.
Without an opportunity to qualify for or obtain a job on merit-a man's horizons are dimmed and America's robes of democracy are dragged in the dirt and the cause of liberty-which should stand forth peerless-is soiled and sadly tarnished.
Discrimination against qualified men, whether it be by an employer, a labor organization, an employment agency, or
* 10, 189
Pending (hearing started for 3).
Includes 8 complaints not related to employment, public accommodations, housing, or education.
129 of these complaints were settled by a consent order without being ordered for public hearing. Of the remaining 94, their status as of Dec. 31, 1963, is as follows:
Settled or discontinued before hearing.
Settled during hearing..
Pending (hearing started for 7)..
A hearing is sometimes concerned with 2 or more similar complaints. The 94 complaints ordered for hearing were equivalent to 51 hearings, as follows:
Settled or discontinued before hearing..
Settled during hearing..
in an apprentice or on-the-job training program-is morally reprehensible. It cannot be condoned. It is a tragic waste of America's human resources.
It is my hope that the FEPC title in this bill will be strongly supported in both this House and in the other body.
For if a man on merit be denied a job and a decent wage, all else of his family's future is imperiled; his house or apartment may be substandard and in rundown areas of our core cities-and this impinges directly on our schools and his children's opportunity for academic competition and excellence.
As a former chairman of the New York State Commission for Human Rights, the first such State body, created in 1945, perhaps you will permit me to say that an equal employment commission works and works well.
Results in human terms underscore this, and the figures further confirm it. From 1945 to 1963-10,869 total complaints were filed-over 8,000 of these on employment and the vast majority were
settled voluntarily by conference, conciliation, and persuasion. Of the some 1 percent that finally went to public hearings, only 12 today are still pending. The New York State Commission for Human Rights has pioneered effectively and it has now been copied in 22 States of the Union with fair employment laws covering some 64 percent of the American people.
Therefore, from conviction and from a little experience, I strongly support this title and the overall bill-H.R. 7152.
Now, in Lincoln's phrase, let the news go forth from this great House that America recognizes its responsibilities and, above all, that the American people-through this body-will make hope, human dignity, and equal opportunity a reality now for all Americans. Let it be said we kept covenant with the American dream.
I insert the following table of the disposition of complaints filed with the New York State Commission for Human Rights, 1945-63-for the information of the Members.