Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Rights and Liberties

Who Passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

By Nicolaus Mills, Dissent Magazine. Posted February 22, 2008.


The Clinton/Obama debate over who deserves credit for the Civil Rights Act has died down. But a history lesson is in order.
mlklbj
Civil Rights Act
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Like so many of my generation who did voter registration work in the South during the 1960s, I have been saddened by the debate that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama sparked over whether Martin Luther King or President Lyndon Johnson was responsible for the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act that outlawed discrimination in hiring and public accommodations. Instead of providing voters with a thoughtful view of the recent past, Clinton and Obama combined to offer a crude, "great man" theory of history in which King's vision and Johnson's pragmatism were portrayed as antithetical forces.

The debate has quieted down. But it should not be allowed to fade from the headlines without a reminder of the lesson this controversy threatened to obscure -- blacks and whites across America relied on one another to make the Civil Rights Act of 1964 a reality.

The act had its legislative origins in a June 11, 1963 speech that President John Kennedy delivered on national television after Justice Department officials, aided by federal marshals, forced Alabama Governor George Wallace to stand aside while two black students were admitted to the previously segregated University of Alabama. "If an American, because his skin is dark … cannot enjoy the full and free life which all of us want, then who among us would be content to have the color of his skin changed and stand in his place?" Kennedy asked the country.

But Kennedy's speech, which was followed hours later by the murder of Mississippi civil rights leader Medgar Evers in Jackson, did not guarantee a speedy passage of civil rights legislation. A coalition of southern Democrats and conservative Republicans stood in the way and the best that Kennedy could do before his November 22 assassination was to get his civil rights bill voted out of committee.

It fell to President Lyndon Johnson to get Kennedy's civil rights legislation enacted. Soon after taking office, Johnson made his intentions clear. "We have talked long enough in this country about equal rights," he told a joint session of Congress on November 27. "It is time now to write the next chapter and to write it in books of law." At this same time, Martin Luther King was playing a crucial role in shaping public opinion. His April 16 "Letter from Birmingham Jail" and his August 28 speech "I Have a Dream" galvanized millions of Americans who in the past had remained passive when support for civil rights was needed.

Still, it was not until 1964 that Kennedy's civil rights bill got through Congress. On February 10, the House passed the bill by a vote of 290 to 130 and on June 19, in the wake of a record-breaking 75-day filibuster, which took up 534 hours, the Senate passed its version of the civil rights bill by a 73 to 27 margin. Now Lyndon Johnson began pressuring Congress to reach agreement on a bill that he could sign by July 4.

At this moment, Johnson benefited not only from the civil rights coalition led by Martin Luther King but from the grassroots work of Bob Moses, then a young organizer for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) who had been active in Mississippi since 1961. At a November 1963 SNCC meeting, Moses had proposed a 1964 "Summer Project" in Mississippi that would make extensive use of college students, getting them to teach in freedom schools and carry out voter registration drives. A black-white coalition, Moses believed, would engage the whole country. But no sooner had the Summer Project begun when three of its participants -- Michael Schwerner, James Chaney, and Andrew Goodman -- disappeared on June 21 near Philadelphia, Mississippi.

Their disappearance (their bodies would later be found buried in an earthen dam) could not be ignored by America. Television cameras and the print media descended on Mississippi while state officials acted as if nothing of importance had happened. "They could be in Cuba," joked Mississippi Governor Paul Johnson.

It was the worst response that the diehard segregationists of the Deep South could have made. The influence of Martin Luther King, Lyndon Johnson, and John Kennedy, along with years of demonstrations and sit-ins, had created a political tide that reached its peak with the disappearance of the three men. On July 2, two days ahead of schedule, Congress, under heavy public pressure, agreed to the civil rights bill that Johnson wanted. Five hours later in a White House signing ceremony timed to coincide with the evening news, the president addressed the nation.

"One hundred and eighty-eight years ago this week a small band of valiant men began a long struggle for freedom," Johnson told the nation. "Now our generation of Americans has been called on to continue the unending search for justice within our own borders." The analogy was unmistakable. The president was comparing the work of the Founding Fathers with that of the civil rights movement.

Martin Luther King, who was present at the White House signing ceremony, also had no doubts about the significance of the day or about Lyndon Johnson's role in making the civil rights bill law. "It was a great moment," King declared, "something like the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation by Abraham Lincoln."

Today, we cannot know exactly what Johnson and King, two coalition builders, would say about the efforts to portray them as civil rights rivals. But it is hard to imagine that both would not have seen comparisons that pit them against each other as inimical to the civil rights movement they believed in. As King observed of the struggle for racial justice in his "Letter from Birmingham Jail": "We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny."

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: lyndon johnson, civil rights act, martin luther king jr, john f. kennedy, student nonviolent coordi

Nicolaus Mills is a professor of American Studies at Sarah Lawrence College and author of Like a Holy Crusade: Mississippi 1964—The Turning of the Civil Rights Movement in America and most recently, Winning the Peace: The Marshall Plan and America s Coming of Age as a Superpower.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Nearly Normal Warren
Posted by: wkress on Feb 22, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Johnson/King history is good and informative but the real understanding of history is to understand that those heros who were in the right place at the right time, stood on the shoulders of nameless, countless others who tried and failed but gave hope and awareness to others until finally change was possible.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Nearly Normal Warren Posted by: atruedemocrat
Whose Doing the Pitting?
Posted by: desidid on Feb 22, 2008 1:32 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most Black Americans I know, in my age group, would say Johnson did more for Blacks, than any other president. After all during his time in office he got 100 bills passed that dealt with Civil Rights. On the other hand one cannot diminish what those with boots on the ground faced daily. Trying to change the hearts and minds of a country from freedom rides, lunch counter sit-ins, and marches is far more difficult than using the bully pulpit of the oval office. And while Johnson certainly put himself on the line, he was far safer than Dr. King, Malcolm X, or Medgar Evers. I think the most telling thing in this article is the link between what happened to those 3 students in Philadelphia, Ms. and, why Reagan kicked off his racist campaigns/administrations in Philadelphia, Mississippi.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another Thing
Posted by: desidid on Feb 22, 2008 1:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This argument reminds me of a movie I watched the other day "The Jackie Robinson Story" which, actually starred Jackie Robinson. In his story there is a scene where Branch Rickey is explaining to Jackie the only way he can sign him is, if he is willing and able to take whatever White people throw his way (both physically and verbally) without reacting. In the end, though both men had something to lose, can anyone compare what they each faced daily? In my opinion this is why Black and White people see this issue so differently. No matter that Blacks suffered much differently than most White people in the movement, in the end, any White sacrafice is viewed as equal to Black suffering. In my mind sacrafice and suffering are two completely different things.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Another Thing Posted by: no1kstate
Free at last
Posted by: Democritus on Feb 27, 2008 3:23 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is there any doubt that racism still lives in our country? Wait until the racists start slinging their mud onto Barack Obama. Just take a look at the latest newspaper reports from the Southern Poverty Law Center to see what the skinheads are prepared to do to to advance their white supremacist views.

Isn't it time to free ourselves from race as the defining characteristic of what we are? Aren't the words of Martin Luther King enough to ennoble us? "Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't forget the Senator from Minnesota
Posted by: thekatman on Feb 27, 2008 5:03 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hubert H Humphrey was Johnson's Vice President at the time and it was HHH who managed the Senatorial effort to get the signatures.

Yes, the boots on the ground laid the foundation , from the grass roots level, but it was Johnson and Humphrey who made it happen, of course with King's approval and wisdom.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who passed th civil rights act of 1964
Posted by: rdemocracy@comcast.net on Feb 27, 2008 10:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know your question is loaded, and remark about Clinton and Obama sparring over this issue is a mistake. I heard Senatore Clinton make the remark about Johnson's signing of the civil rights act of 1964. I did not here Obama respond to her statement, I heard African Americans become slightly disappointed by her comment, and I was also saddened that Senator Clinton felt the need to make the comment on Dr. King's Birthday, we understand that the president with the support of the Congress actually passes the law, but because we live in a representative Government, I guess people viewed it from the perspective that the President and Government were using there auhority to inact the will of the people. Having said that, I believe that Senator Clinton's word and actions during the course of this campaign season really underscore why she does not need to be the President of the United States, this country needs to be healed, but Senator Clinton's words which are the manifestation of her thoughts and values leave many Americans wounded. Dr.King's Birthday is the day that we thank him for his contribution to this struggle; it does not mean that on President's day we cannot thank and acknowledge both Kennedy and Johnson for their courage and contributions. But the real problem with this entire episode is that African Americans had been granted civil rights by the civil rights act of 1883 as a part of the 15th ammendment, that is why the supreme court ruled segregation unconstitutional, and the children in Brown vs. The Board of Education were entitled to protection by the Federal Government. Infact, Johnson did not have to reinvent the wheel, Johnson could have convened a panel to examine the legality of the Jim Crow laws of the South and the panel could have appealed to the supreme court to have the Jim Crow laws over turned, because they were in clear violation of the 15th ammendment to the constitution which protected African Americans rights, and liberties in the
the same way that the entire constitution is drafted to protect and ensure American citizens their individual rights and freedom as people equally entitled to those rights endowed by God.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

William F. Buckley (1925-2008), RIP
Posted by: Woodpecker on Feb 28, 2008 3:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have long been ambivalent about the late William F. Buckley, Catholic layman and conservative commentator. although I disagreed with his social( not to mention political!) views ( he was borderline racist towards blacks and a declared homophobe), I did like some of his "Blackford Oakes" novels.

Anybody feel as I do?

Terry

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement