nistration intends to rely upon its own construction of "discrimion" as including the lack of racial balance, as distinguished from tutory reference to "racial imbalance." A study of the 1961 port of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights," recent Executive rs, and regulations proposed by the Secretary of the U.S. Departof Labor demonstrate that the omission of this reference is upon heory the same is not necessary to carry out the intention of the inistration. The discussion herein is founded upon this assump he method which the administration intends to employ to attain ial balance" is illustrated by the standards proposed by the Secreof Labor on October 25, 1963, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 22, concerninion apprenticeship programs. These standards require, "The tion of apprentices on the basis of qualifications alone * * * unthe selections otherwise made would themselves demonstrate that e is equality of opportunity," and "The taking of whatever steps ecessary, in acting upon application lists developed prior to this , to remove the effects of previous practices under which discriminatory rns of employment may have resulted." will be noted that the word "discrimination" is nowhere defined he destruction of individual liberty and freedom of choice result- *** the Bill of Rights is concerned only with the protection of the individual against the impact of Federal and State law. ean Roscoe Pound, dean emeritus of Harvard University School aw, said in 1957 in his "The Development of Constitutional rantees of Liberty": Analytically the bills of rights are bills of liberties. They define circumstances and situations and occasions in which politically organized society will keep its hands off and permit free, spontaneous, individual activity; they guarantee that the agents and agencies of politically organized society will not do certain things and will not do certain other things otherwise than in certain ways. The de I determining whether this bill should be adopted, it must be embered that when legislation is enacted designed to benefit segment or class of a society, the usual result is the destrucof coexisting rights of the remainder of that society. One dom is destroyed by governmental action to enforce another dom. The governmental restraint of one individual at the est of another implies necessarily the restriction of the civil ties and the destruction of civil rights of the one for the benefit e other. This legislation, then, brings to mind the wise statement Feorge Washington: Government is not reason, it is not eloquence-it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. every Am race are m duties, are can success The age the Attorn description. goes this far and no farther. The language written into the bill is not of that sort. It has open-end provisions that give it whatever depth and intensity one desires to read into it. In the language of the bill, "The President is authorized to take such action as may be appropriate to prevent ***" (sec. 711(b)), and "Each Federal ** shall take action to effectuate ** department and agency (sec. 602). This vests, of course, almost unlimited authority by the President and his appointees to do whatever they desire. * It is, in the most literal sense, revolutionary, destructive of the very essence of life as it has been lived in this country since the adoption of our Constitution. Because this is true, the undersigned members of this committee believe it wise to demonstrate, by example, the effects of this legislation on people; to demonstrate, by example, the meaning of lost liberty; to demonstrate, by example, the power in this bill to completely dominate the lives of even the least of us. To this end, there follow nine examples of the effect of the bill upon persons covered by it. There might be offered innumerable examples, because this bill encompasses directly or indirectly nearly every American. Farmers For more than 30 years, the American farmer has been under Federal regulation in many programs involving financial aid. Whether these regulations have served him well or poorly is a matter of divided opinion. In any event, regulation per se is nothing new to the farmer. But this is a different kind of control. It is not related to the purposes for which the financial aid was rendered. If this bill is enacted the farmer (regardless of the number of his employees) would be required to hire people of all races, without preference for any race. If experience has taught the farmer that a member of one race is less reliable than a member of another race, does less for his pay, he will no longer be allowed to hire those he prefers for this reason. If he is of the belief that members of one race are more prone to accident, less trustworthy, more neglectful of duties, are, in short, less desirable employees than those of another race, he will no longer be allowed to exercise his independent judgment. Under the power conferred by this bill, he may be forced to hire according to race, to "racially balance" those who work for him in every job classification or be in violation of Federal law. The penalty for such violation can mean being excluded from every direct and indirect Federal "benefit." It can mean the calling of his bank loans, being shut off by blacklisting from the agencies of Government that recruit labor, the right to purchase supplies from farmer-associated businesses which may, themselves, be dependent in one degree or another on Federal financial assistance. In short, he will become a pariah, an outcast. He will employ those people a Federal inspector says he shall employ or his farm will be deprived of every vestige of Federal "aid," without which few farms, today, can successfully operate. The agencies required to police farmers, under the directions of the Attorney General and the Commission on Civil Rights, are all ate credit banks, (4) production credit associations, (5) the Agriral Stabilization and Conservation Service, (6) the Commodity it Corporation, (7) the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, he Agricultural Marketing Service, (9) the Farmers' Home Adstration, (10) the Soil Conservation Service, and all other agencies partments having to do with Federal financial assistance in the of agriculture. eowners * * e right of homeowners in the United States to freely build, deral personnel (not the homeowner or his wife) will make deci- hat of the right of property? What if the person who seeks to a room, lease or buy a home, is not, in the eyes of the homeowner, worthy or desirable? If race, color, or national origin is ined-and, by the nature of things, these must be involved-the ral inspector (not the homeowner or his wife) makes the decision. alternative foreclosure, blacklisting, cancellation of any Federal its under any program. ready, without any legislative authority whatsoever, the President ssued Executive Order 11063 dated November 20, 1962, purporto put all of the above into effect concerning an estimated 30 nt of the homebuilding in the United States. This has been done ite of the fact that Congress, on six different occasions, defeated dments to then pending housing acts granting the President authority act. If this bill is passed, it will validate that order. Moreover, 1 give the President carte blanche to subject every homeowner to ral control. Es and bankers required t protection To illus struction privilege acter, in t able tena criminati The ag tion of th all nation Federal FNMA, a Among conform t are all ba tutions se agencies a and progr protection sanctions Labor uni To milli most valu and a rate knows bet dependent their incep Without it values to i The pro The action beginning, powers gra to destroy t To distu unionism. hiring hall being whit in favor of race. And penters of agent must lated race i local could Neither c this bill. I Specific However, in as may be a unlawful en (sec. 711(b authority. dispassionate study of the power granted in this bill will convince sonable person that no bank could operate under its provisions out undue hardship. a bank under this bill were to deny employment, a loan, a line of t or a sales contract to a person, it would have to prove its decision based on facts that did not, in any way, discriminate against the ted applicant because of his race. Among the penalties that I be imposed on the bank would be the cancellation of the bank's al deposit insurance and its right to handle GI, FHA, and other nment-insured money. The power granted in the bill goes further. small businessman, for instance, has been held in violation of the 10 mustrace, assume a vank extends a ine or credit to inance con struction of an apartment house. Assume a tenant is denied the privilege of leasing one of the apartments because his credit or character, in the opinion of the management, would make him an undesirable tenant. If the Federal inspector decided this amounted to discrimination, the FHA guarantee could be canceled. The agencies required to police banks and bankers, under the direction of the Attorney General and the Commission on Civil Rights, are all national banks, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Housing Administration, FNMA, and all similar agencies. Among the institutions and agencies which would be required to conform to the act and police business and professional establishments are all banks, savings and loan associations, and other financial institutions served by the FDIC or the Federal Reserve System, the agencies administering GI, FHA, FNMA, SBA, and all other loans and programs involving Federal financial assistance. Withdrawal of protection or credit, foreclosure of loans, blacklisting, and similar sanctions may be expected. Labor unions and members To millions of working men and women, union membership is the most valuable asset they own. It is designed to insure job security and a rate of pay higher than they otherwise would receive. As none knows better than the union member, himself, these two benefits are dependent upon the system of seniority the unions have followed since their inception. Seniority is the base upon which unionism is founded. Without its system of seniority, a union would lose one of its greatest values to its members. The provisions of this act grant the power to destroy union seniority. The action of the Secretary of Labor already mentioned is merely the beginning, if this legislation is adopted. With the full statutory powers granted by this bill, the extent of actions which would be taken to destroy the seniority system is unknown and unknowable. To disturb this traditional practice is to destroy a vital part of unionism. Under the power granted in this bill, if a carpenters' hiring hall, say, had 20 men awaiting call, the first 10 in seniority being white carpenters, the union could be forced to pass them over in favor of carpenters beneath them in seniority, but of the stipulated race. And if the union roster did not contain the names of the carpenters of the race needed to "racially balance" the job, the union agent must, then, go into the street and recruit members of the stipulated race in sufficient number to comply with Federal orders, else his local could be held in violation of Federal law. Neither competence nor experience is the key for employment under this bill. Race is the principal, first, criterion. Specific penalties are provided for violation of this bill (title VII). However, in addition, the President "is authorized to take such action as may be appropriate to prevent the committing or continuing of an unlawful employment practice" in connection with title VI of the bill (sec. 711(b)). This, of course, amounts to practically unlimited authority. Unions held in violation of this bill may lose their rights act, the way unui acu, one Davis-Daton Acu, une Unions ey Act, and other legislation beneficial to labor. Representation res. oreover, this bill affects unions from the other end, that of the oyer, since the law applies to the employer, as well. It extends ilroads, motor carriers, airlines and steamship companies handling or other Government shipments, enterprises receiving loans from Small Business Administration, construction contractors financed ugh FHA or GI home loan insurance, the rural electrification ram and practically all others (secs. 601, 602). onsequently, however meticulous a local union may be as pertains s racial practices, if a contractor, for example, has been adjudged y of discrimination and must, therefore, hire 100 or 1,000 workers given race-in preference to all others-before his job becomes ially balanced," it means the local which supplies his labor can him only union members of that particular race-and the memof other races will sit until that number has been employed. If inion does not have among its membership the number required, ust recruit membership of that race to supply the contractor's This is a specific instance of the Federal Government interg in the contract rights of unions and employers. S. threat of contract cancellation and blacklisting, contractors d be forced to actively recruit employees of a specified race and ade them into skilled classifications, although this would displace n members in the skilled trades. Where skilled tradesmen of the fied race were not available from union sources, the agency t that they be recruited from nonunion sources, notwithstanding ing union shop or exclusive referral agreements. viduals at work could nion members are not the only working people affected by this All employees of private industry and apparently those under ral civil service will be affected. Assume that a nonunion idual is employed by a corporation which has more than 25 le on its payroll (title VII), or is employed by a smaller corporawhich has an SBA, FHA, or other federally supported loan or ract (title VI, sec. 711(b)). Assume that his firm, in his job ification, historically has employed people only of his particular whatever that race may be. Assume that a demand is made his firm abide by a Federal regulation requiring racial balance in lepartment. To comply-unless unneeded employees are to be -somebody has to go. Who? sume two women of separate races apply to that firm for the ion of stenographer; further assume that the employer, for some Finable reason, prefers one above the other, whether because of onality, superior alertness, intelligence, work history, or general ness. Assume the employer has learned good things about the acter of one and derogatory things about the character of the r which are not subject to proof. If his firm is not "racially nced," under such regulation he has no choice, he must employ person of that race which, by ratio, is next up, even though he is wowiu pa That s one race For, unde P not remov The press What su |