Last Sunday the Washington Star quoted a Negro mother as she waited in the recorder's court in Birmingham for her son's case to be called. Her comment was:

Anything worth having is worth fighting for. If I had done this 16 years ago maybe he wouldn't have to do it today.

As we look back on the events of recent months, we might say to the Negro mother that had the expanded functions suggested today for the Commission been given to it 5 years ago, critical tensions there and elsewhere might have been avoided. Had we had the vision to create the Civil Rights Commission 16 years ago, the course of history might have been substantially altered.

Today I would like to direct my remarks to just one facet of the civil rights problem, and one which, I believe, illustrates the important role the Commission can play in the future with the additional powers suggested in S. 1117.

The subcommittee chairman has already commented, with his usual care and in language that reflects the depth of his convictions, about that section of the Commission's report dealing with the withholding of funds furnished Mississippi.

I think in many quarters that section of the report has been misinterpreted and, perhaps, distorted. I would like to quote just briefly one portion, one pertinent portion, of the report. It reads this way:

We urgently request that the Congress and the President consider seriously whether legislation is appropriate and desirable to assure that Federal funds contributed by citizens of all States not be made available to any State which continues to refuse to abide by the Constitution and laws of the United States.

No Member of Congress has been free from trouble and doubt, I am sure in the years that preceded 1963, as to the most responsible way of facing up to the problem that the Civil Rights Commission very dramatically described to us in its report on Mississippi.

As the subcommittee chairman said, education is an essential key to changing regional attitudes, eliminating prejudice.

The argument goes that if the funds are shut off by executive action or by legislative amendment to an education bill, which thereby fails of passage, in either event the schools will be either closed or operating at a lower level of excellence than otherwise would obtain and, therefore, don't shut off the money, therefore don't support what has come to be known as the Powell amendment.

The argument goes further: Is there any principle with such priority that you would deny an opportunity to raise the educational excellence for anybody in America?

What we have here, I am sure, is a number of principles that call for judgment and application.

Each of us in our own conscience has to determine which of these principles has highest priority, and in my book the proposition that you do not longer use the money that is contributed by every American to support institutions and programs the admission to which is denied some of those Americans is the principle of highest priority.

In any event, I was struck by the subcommittee chairman's comment that this would visit the sins of the fathers on the children. To be suggested equally is that the sins of the fathers already are visited upon the children so long as there is segregated schooling or any other discriminatory use of public facilities.

In any event, with respect to this recommendation of the Committee, the President, as evidenced by his Executive order establishing the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity, his Executive order on discrimination in housing, continues to recognize the urgency of removing all discrimination from Federal programs. The time is now when the greatest skill must be applied by both the Congress and the executive branch to insure our dual objectives, getting the educational levels raised, making broader the availability of hospital services, improving all of these services, and doing so in a nondiscriminatory manner.

This recommendation of the Commission, I think, is not really dramatic at all. It is just the expression of a common sense concern. For a number of years we in the Congress have taken a piecemeal approach to the problem, and to make a considerable understatement, it has not been noticeably successful.

Now, the Commission, to its credit, as Senator Bayh has said, has placed the problem right in front of us. Shall the Federal Government through grants and loans of its funds continue to support patterns of racial discrimination throughout this country?

As I have indicated, in my book, the answer is clear, and we again, as Senator Bayh has underscored, owe a debt of gratitude to the Commission for putting the issue before us in unmistakable terms.

As the subcommittee chairman indicated, it is my understanding that the Commission now has underway several investigations bearing on this question, and the reports are scheduled to be issued later this year. There will be a report on minority access to federally assisted training programs under the National Defense Education Act, the Manpower Development and Training Act, and the Area Redevelopment Act. The report on equal opportunity in the Armed Forces, the third report, will focus on the access of minority groups to facilities and medical care provided by the Hill-Burton Act and program. These findings, I think, would be invaluable.

Recently, I have written to a number of the heads of executive departments and agencies inquiring as to whether or not they consider they now have sufficient authority to withhold Federal funds from grant, loan, and contract programs which they administer if it was found that such programs are operated or applied in a discriminatory manner.

If it is thought that such authority does not now exist, then Congress clearly will have the responsibility, as I see it, to provide the authority.

Of course, there are many Federal agencies and programs which now have a nondiscriminatory policy. This is the beginning, not the end. Here the problem lies in the difficulties encountered in implementing the policy, applying it.

Under its present grant of authority, the Civil Rights Commission has only very limited means of providing assistance to Federal agencies on the administration and staffing of civil rights programs.

Under the new authority provided in S. 1117, the Commission would be authorized, as a major responsibility, to consult with and make recommendations to Federal agencies regarding the means for implementing nondiscrimination policies, including techniques of administration, enforcement, review and evaluation, and the orientation and training of existing personnel of the agencies to administer the policy.

It seems to me that our objective in authorizing these new functions should be affirmatively to provide the skills and adjustments that will obviate the possibility that any Federal funds will have to be suspended because of the violation of constitutional guarantees.

As the subcommittee chairman rightly describes it, he says that is punitive. He said that punitive action is certainly the least desirable course for the Congress, the executive branch to have to follow. It is far better if we provide tools and programs by means of which this can be avoided.

Mr. Chairman, I would ask leave to submit, when I complete it, for the record, a memorandum on extension of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, and this, I would attempt to provide as a review of the present functions and operations of the commission, and make suggestions as to how the expanded authority recommended in the President's message might be put into operation, and the justification for an extension of its life.

I would also, in closing, Mr. Chairman, be remiss if I did not indicate the sincere view held by many of the sponsors of S. 1117, which has bipartisan sponsorship and, as I say, numbers 30 of us. This bill is only one part of a long overdue legislative program. Many of us are sponsors of legislative proposals to strengthen and extend existing programs and policies in the field of voting, employment, education, and to grant to the Attorney General broad authority to seek relief on behalf of citizens whose basic civil rights are violated. To the extent that these bills are before this subcommittee, we will respectfully suggest that the subcommittee, after considering the Civil Rights Commission bills, move on to these other areas during the present session of the Congress.

MEMORANDUM BY SENATOR PHILIP A. HART ON EXTENSION OF THE

U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

In his civil rights message of February 28, 1963, President Kennedy asked that the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights be extended for a period of 4 years. He also proposed that its duties be expanded so that it could serve as a clearinghouse for civil rights information and provide technical assistance to Government agencies, communities, industries, organizations and individuals in respect to equal protection of the laws. The administration's proposal in the Senate is S. 1117 and it was introduced in the House as H.R. 5456.

Following is background information concerning the proposed legislation :

I. PRESENT FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMISSION

The Civil Rights Act of 1957 established the Commission on Civil Rights as a bipartisan agency to investigate civil rights problems and report to the President and Congress with recommendations for corrective action. Specifically the Commission is directly by law to

Investigate formal allegations that citizens are being deprived of their right to vote and have that vote counted by reason of their color, race, religion, or national origin;

Study and collect information concerning legal developments which constitute a denial of equal protection of the laws under the Constitution;

Prepare and submit interim reports to the President and Congress and a final and comprehensive report of its activities at the time of its scheduled expiration.

Originally the Commission was established for a 2-year period and received successive 2-year extensions in 1959 and 1961. The present expiration date is November 30, 1963.

The six Commissioners presently serving by appointment of the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, are:

Dr. John A. Hannah, Chairman, president, Michigan State University. Robert G. Storey, Vice Chairman, president, Southwestern Legal Foundation.

Erwin N. Griswold, dean, Harvard University Law School.

Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, C.S.C., president, Notre Dame University. Robert S. Rankin, Department of Political Science, Duke University. Spottswood W. Robinson III, dean, Howard University Law School. The day-to-day operations of the Commission are under the direction of the staff director, Berl I. Bernhard, also a Presidential appointee. The staff consists of 72 employees. For fiscal year 1963 the Commission has received an appropriation of $950,000.

The Commission was given the power to hold hearings, and to compel the production of documents and the attendance of witnesses, in order to assist it in its factfinding functions. Major voting hearings were held in Alabama in 1958 and in New Orleans in 1961. Hearings on the status of equal protection of the laws have also been held in all areas of the country including New York, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Atlanta, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Memphis, Newark, and Indianapolis.

The State advisory committees authorized by law consist of 487 citizens of standing in each of the 50 States and the District of Columbia. These committees gather information through surveys, public meetings, and conferences with Government officials and their reports to the Commission form a part of the basis for the Commission's reports.

Annual conferences of educators have been held by the Commission since 1959 to collect information concerning the problems of transition from segregated to desegregated public school systems. It has also held periodic conferences of housing experts to gather data concerning equal protection in this area.

Commission reports

In 1959 the Commission issued a final report containing findings, conclusions, and recommendations in the fields of voting, housing, and education.

In 1961 the Commission published an interim report on problems of equal protection in higher education.

The 1961 final report included reports on recent developments in voting, housing, and education, concentrating particularly on areas not previously studied (e.g., the role of federally regulated and assisted financial institutions in housing discrimination). It also included reports on the administration of justice (the effectiveness of Federal laws protecting against private violence, police brutality, and racial exclusion from juries), employment (the role of the Federal Government in providing equal opportunity in government employment and in jobs created by Federal contracts and assistance), and a preliminary study of the civil rights problems of Indians.

The Commission has issued a number of interim reports since its extension in 1961 such as that concerning housing discrimination in the District of Columbia. A report on civil rights progress during the past 100 years, undertaken at the request of the President in connection with the centennial of the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation, was also made. There have been reports on the status of school desegregation in four southern communities and in four communities in the North and West, a report on the status of equal protection in Mississippi, and several special reports of the State advisory committees. Results of the Commission's investigations and reports

Many of the recommendations made by the Commission in its reports have been acted upon by the President, the executive agencies, and Congress.

The President's Executive order requiring equal opportunity in federally assisted housing was based upon recommendations made by the Commission in its 1959 and 1961 reports. The Commission's 1959 proposals on voting formed the basis and provided much of the impetus for the Civil Rights Act of 1960.

The detailed information about Negro registration and denials of the right to vote developed at the Montgomery and New Orleans hearings and through other investigations has furnished the Department of Justice with a basis for independent investigation which has resulted in the initiation of a number of successful suits under the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

The Commission also receives complaints concerning the denials of rights for reasons of race and, where appropriate, brings them to the attention of Federal agencies which have remedial powers. In a number of cases pension rights

and benefits have been restored to Negro citizens after complaints were brought to the attention of the appropriate Federal agencies and investigated.

II. REASONS FOR THE CLEARINGHOUSE AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FUNCTIONS In his civil rights message to Congress, the President, after summarizing the Commission's past performance and present functions, said:

"There are, of course, many areas of denials of rights yet to be fully investigated. But the Commission is now in a position to provide even more useful service to the Nation."

The President's message went on to describe the functions which the Commission could perform:

"As more communities evidence a willingness to face frankly their problems of racial discrimination, there is an increasing need for expert guidance and assistance in devising workable programs for civil rights progress. Agencies of State and local government, industry, labor, and community organizations, when faced with problems of segregation and racial tensions, all can benefit from information about how these problems have been solved in the past. The opportunity to seek an experienced and sympathetic forum on a voluntary basis can often open channels of communication between contending parties and help bring about conditions necessary for orderly progress. And the use of public hearings to contribute to public knowledge of the requirements of the Constitution and national policy-can create in these communities the atmosphere of understanding which is indispensable to peaceful and permanent solutions to racial problems."

At present the Commission provides information and assistance to government agencies, individuals and organizations on a very limited scale. But these efforts are subordinated to the reporting and factfinding function of the Commission which is mandated by law. At present, the Commission has only one full-time information officer, only two staff members, who devote a large portion of their time to the needs of Federal agencies, and a research staff which can devote only a small portion of its time to requests for information and assistance.

Based upon current and recent requests for information and assistance, passage of the proposed legislation might result in the following Commission activities: Clearinghouse.-(a) The development of general educational material for use by students, civic organizations, and others who have basic questions about the Constitution, laws, and policies of the United States with respect to civil rights; (b) the development of material for Government agencies, organizations, and individuals who have specific civil rights responsibilities; (c) the development of material needed to answer specific requests for information, e.g., a school board's request for information about the details of desegregation plans adopted by other jurisdictions and an assessment of how they worked out in practice; and (d) the development of an adequate library containing books, periodicals, audiovisual materials and guides to finding additional materials on civil rights problems.

Technical assistance.—(a) Consultative services and assistance to State and local governments, e.g., assistance to a Governor's staff in preparing a State fair practices code, consultation with a local school board on desegregation plans, school assignment procedures; (b) consultative services and assistance to industry and unions, e.g., assistance to employers in developing merit hiring and training programs, assistance to a union in desegregating apprenticeship training programs; (c) assistance to Federal agencies, e.g., assistance in evaluation of policies where the Commission has made studies and recommendations regarding the means for implementing new policy including techniques of administration, enforcement, review and evaluation, and the orientation and training of existing personnel of the agencies to administer the new policy; and (d) conferences, e.g., a meeting on equal access to public accommodations including representatives of business and civil rights organizations and Government agencies to exchange information and views on dealing with problems of discrimination and protest.

III. REASONS FOR A 4-YEAR EXTENSION

President Kennedy said in his civil rights message:

"If, however, the Commission is to perform these additional services effectively, changes in its authorizing statute are necessary and it should be placed on a more stable and more permanent basis."