fact, it does not even seek to create any right that does not already exist. It merely seeks ways and means to help make the guarantees of our Constitution, the law of the land, a reality for all Americans.

Discriminatory practices contrary to our Constitution have created a grave danger to our Nation. The time has come when action must be taken and quickly to ease the crisis in race relations.

A portion of our citizenry is being, and has been for the past century, deprived of equal access to and participation in the American experience. This has occurred despite the command to the contrary contained in the U.S. Constitution. That these same people are now demonstrating in the streets and lanes of this country is an understandable result of having learned well, and, yet, not having shared in the tenets of the American democratic system. These expressions of protest are reminiscent of the demonstrations that took place in Boston in the early 1770's.

There comes to mind quickly the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party. The basic reasons for the demonstrations then and now are the same. However, today, the path from demonstration to freedom, a goal which will be reached, must be different. All Americans are appropriately appalled by the violence and bloodshed which have accompanied the Negro demonstrations and which threaten to grow worse. None of us will ever forget the brutal cowardly killing of Mr. Medgar Evers, the terrifying shameful shooting of six white men in Cambridge, or the tyrannical senseless use of police dogs and nightsticks in Birmingham. Yet far too few have expended the energy necessary to formulate alternative solutions designed to aid in the alleviation of this critical problem. Fortunately in Missouri, men of good will have been working for alternative solutions but even there action by the Federal Government would be of the utmost assistance and welcomed by all but a few who do not understand the full meaning of the Declaration of Independence when it said, "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

President Kennedy, assuming the mantle of leadership which is a concomitance of his responsibility as Chief Executive, has sent to us in Congress a program, whose aim is not to provide a tailormade solution but to provide steps toward the resolution of the crisis in American race relations. The specific problems with which this program is designed to cope are not new; rather they are old and almost too familiar. The Supreme Court of the United States, in the last decade, has assumed the ascendant role in the civil rights arena. During the past few years, the executive branch, too, has been a bulwark of assistance. Just a few short weeks ago, President Kennedy reclaimed for the Office of the President moral leadership in achieving true freedom for all Americans. The Congress, now, has the opportunity through the enactment of needed legislation to enter into the thick of the fight for freedom and equality for all Americans.

The committee has before it the seven-point program outlined by President Kennedy on June 19, 1963. The first title of the bill, S. 1731, would provide the additional provisions of law necessary to enforce the constitutional right to vote. Twice before in recent years, Congress has enacted legislation for this purpose but both acts have proved inadequate to achieve this goal.

Title II of the bill prohibits discrimination in public accommodations engaging substantially in interstate commerce. This part of the bill has generated by far the most controversy probably because it affects more people directly. However, it is in this area of life that the Negro is reminded daily that he cannot share equally in our democratic society. His dignity as a man is denied because of the color of his skin. The U.S. Constitution specifically grants to Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. It is this power that title II utilizes to prohibit discrimination by businesses conducted to accommodate interstate travelers or businesses that handle goods that have moved in interstate commerce.

Title III of the bill is directed toward public school desegregation. It would provide financial and technical assistance to school districts that need help to desegregate. It also would give the Attorney General authority to bring civil suits to end segregation. The process of school desegregation in a number of States has moved as slowly as the proverbial snail. This proposal, hopefully, would speed up the process and make the equal protection clause a functional reality for all of our Nation's youth.

The bill also calls for a much needed Community Relations Service. If established, this Service will provide assistance to communities and private individuals in settling disputes, disagreements, and difficulties arising from local discriminatory practices and desegregation efforts.

Next the bill would extend the life of the Civil Rights Commission 4 years and expand its authority to allow it to serve as a national civil rights clearinghouse. The Commission during the past 6 years through its investigations, studies and reports has added immeasurably to our knowledge of the extent of discrimination, the effects of discrimination and possible solutions for_the elimination of discrimination and the strengthening of our Nation's freedom. If this bill is enacted, local communities would be able to turn to the Civil Rights Commission, as well as the Community Relations Service, for information and assistance in resolving racial problems and in making equality a reality. As we all know, the Constitutional Rights Subcommittee by a vote of 5 to 1 has favorably reported S. 1117 to the full committee. S. 1117 is identiIcal to title V of S. 1731. Hearings had been completed on S. 1117 prior to the introduction of S. 1731 and the subcommittee decided it should approve this measure even though it is a part of the comprehensive bill. This action indicates quite clearly that a majority of this committee's subcommittee assigned jurisdiction in the civil rights area believes additional legislation is necessary.

This brings me to the last two points in the bill. Title VI would authorize the executive department to withhold Federal funds in any program or activity if the participants or beneficiaries are discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, religion, or national origin or if individuals are denied participation or benefits therein on the grounds of race, color, religion or national origin. Further, the President would be authorized to prescribe conditions for inclusion in all contracts made in connection with such programs and activities to assure there would be no discrimination in employment by contractors or subcontractors. This part of the bill would insure that except in extraordinary circumstances, Federal funds collected from all taxpayers would not be used in a way that discriminates against some taxpayers because of the color of their skin or the religious beliefs which they hold. The Federal Government must stop being a party to actions contrary to the tenets of American democracy.

The final portion of the bill would provide legislative authority for the President's Commission on Equal Employment Opportunities. This Commission under the able leadership of Vice President Johnson has done an outstanding job during the past few years. However, there is much more to be done.

In the field of equal employment opportunities, there are two problems which must be solved. The first is to eliminate discrimination in hiring and firing. Qualifications for the job must be the criteria not the color of the person's skin. The second problem relates to training and education. Because the Negro has been excluded from the mainstream of American life, many lack the experience so essential to good jobs. Ways and means must be found to fill this void. The Negro must be allowed to participate without discrimination in apprenticeship programs and vocational training. He must have an opportunity to learn a skill or trade. As long as the Negro is excluded from education and training, he cannot enjoy equal employment opportunities. The enactment of this provision will help solve these two problems.

This bill is designed to help make freedom a reality for all Americans in the areas of voting, education, public accommodations, and employment. However, even if enacted in toto, it will not provide the coveted panacea. Conscientious and responsible work and actions by all Americans will still be required. As discrimination ends, the Negro will have to apply himself to his newly won freedom. The Congress by legislation can only help to bring to all Americans the rights and opportunities of full citizenship. It is then up to each citizen to determine what he makes of his rights and opportunities. Individual initiative, determination, and hard work will continue to be the requirements for success.

In conclusion, I want to urge upon the committee the need for immediate action. For a century, we have allowed discrimination to flourish. The time for congressional action is now.

While the President's program does not provide the final solution, it will go a long way toward assuaging the troubled circumstances in which the participants in the American experiment find themselves today. I hope the whole program will be enacted quickly into law.

The CHAIRMAN. Proceed, sir.

Who on the Republican side?

Senator KEATING. I have a short statement.

Senator DIRKSEN. Mr. Chairman, I have a long statement, but I doubt very much whether I will make it to the committee. I would rather withhold it until some other appropriate time.

The CHAIRMAN. All right.

Senator JOHNSTON. Mr. Chairman, I have a very extended explanation of the bill, and I will give it at the proper time. I don't think now is the proper time to give it.

The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to hear from you, Senator Johnston.

Senator DIRKSEN. Mr. Chairman, may I ask Senator Ervin how long his statement is?

Senator ERVIN. I will have to talk very rapidly to finish it in an hour.

Senator DIRKSEN. I wonder, if the suggestion is in order, whether our distinguished friend will sit down front where we can see him better.

Senator ERVIN. Yes.

Senator KEFAUVER. Mr. Chairman, the Attorney General has been scheduled. Can't we hear him first?

The CHAIRMAN. A member of the committee has the first opportunity to testify. That is the procedure. And I have advised the Attorney General that several members wanted to testify. He has gone.

Senator HART. Mr. Chairman, I am glad to reserve the statement which I had intended to make. It will come as no surprise. I wanted simply to indicate my full support for the recommendation of the administration, and suggest this should have very highest priority, indicating that we came closer to disaster in Birmingham than we have in Cuba, in my judgment, and the first order of business from this committee and Congress should be to enact the recommendation for appropriate amendments.

I fear that we will lose time that we should better spend listening to outside witnesses, than if I presented in full my statement. So I withdraw.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Ervin is recognized.

Senator DIRKSEN. Mr. Chairman, let me ask the Senator.

I wonder if you would indulge me about 5 minutes to set up a little chronology, because I think it is of interest as to what happened in the generation of this program, and how it got here, in the form of three different bills, one in the Commerce Committee and two before the Judiciary Committee.

Senator ERVIN. Yes, I would be glad to do so.

Senator DIRKSEN. I don't believe it will take more than 5 minutes. Well, Mr. Chairman, on June 5, 1963, Senator Hickenlooper and I, together with Congressmen Halleck and Arends of the House, conferred with the President at the President's request for a general discussion of civil rights legislation. At that time no commitments were made, and no commitments were given.

Just a day or two before that, the Republican conference committee met to consider civil rights measures, and, at that time, I drafted a statement which, with some modification, was approved by the conference.

On June 11, 6 days later, the President called another conference in the White House, including Democrat and Republican leaders, both House and Senate.

The meeting was devoted to general discussion, in view of the President's hope and intention of submitting to Congress a civil rights message, and a number of legislative proposals on that subject, each as separate measures, or as a single package.

A first draft of these proposals was submitted to me on June 14 by Mr. Marshall, of the Department of Justice, for weekend study, and another conference thereafter of the leaders of both Houses and both parties was held at the White House with the President on Monday morning, June 17. At that time, I stated, speaking for myself, I could accept most of the provisions of the proposed measure, except for title II, dealing with public accommodations and facilities.

There was a general discussion of the matter, but no request was made for and no offer of commitments was made in behalf of either party.

The following day, Tuesday, June 18, in my office in the Capitol, and at the request of the majority leader, Mr. Mansfield, another conference took place, attended by the majority leader, and Senator Humphrey, myself, and Senator Kuchel-I think Senator Hayden was present. Mr. Sorensen, the attaché of the White House, Mr. Mike Manatos, also a White House attaché, and Mr. Schlei, of the Department of Justice.

In the course of that conference, we examined the latest draft of the civil rights administration package, and again I stated that for myself I could accept all except title II, dealing with accommodations and facilities.

It was at that meeting in my office that it was agreed that Senator Manfield, for himself and other Senators, would introduce the administration program. It was agreed, also, that the majority leader and Senator Magnuson and others would introduce title II as a separate bill, and have it referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce.

It was further agreed that the administration package without title II would be introduced by Senator Mansfield and myself, and others. At the time of its introduction, I stated that I could in good conscience and as the minority leader for my party-I could sponsor all but title II in the administration bill, because the titles relating to voting rights, enforcement of school desegregation cases, the community relations office, the withholding of Federal funds, guarantees, and insurance where segregation was permitted, the extension of the Civil Rights Commission, and other items were clearly in conformity with the pledges made to the Nation by the Republican Party in its platform in 1960.

These, then, are the measures before us:

Senate 1732, dealing only with discrimination in public accommodations now before the Commerce Committee-and, incidentally I have drafted a voluntary title without injunctive relief as a substitute title II which has also been referred to the Commerce Committee. In

addition, there is 1731, which is the entire administration bill referred to the Judiciary Committee, and Senate 1750, introduced by Senator Mansfield and myself and others, which contains all except title II of the administration bill, and which also was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

That, Mr. Chairman, is the chronology of the conferences by which this package was finally submitted, and how two of these bills came to the Judiciary Committee; and the third one; namely, title II, and my substitute for title II went to the Committee on Commerce.

Senator KEFAUVER. Mr. Chairman, may I again raise this question of the matter of procedure. I know Senator Ervin's statement will be very helpful and interesting and persuasive. But shouldn't the Cabinet member proposing the legislation present his viewpoint, and let others

The CHAIRMAN. We have always had the rule that the members of the committee had the first right to make a statement. That was understood by the Attorney General in advance.

Senator Ervin said he wanted to make a statement. The Attorney General has gone back to his office.

Senator KEFAUVER. Well, Senator Ervin's statement is not printed. I see the Attorney General's statement is put out for release. I wonder if he could first present his position, and others present their position, which would be more meaningful.

The CHAIRMAN. I believe the committee members have certain rights. As far as the Chair is concerned, they will be respected. Senator Dodd, I understand, desired to make a statement. The Attorney General understood all that in advance. Proceed.

Senator ERVIN. Mr. Chairman, I am somewhat reluctant not to conform my action to the wishes of my good friend, the senior Senator from Tennessee. But I happen to represent a viewpoint in respect to the administration's so-called civil rights proposals which has not yet been presented.

The Attorney General has presented his viewpoint before the House committee. Moreover, it has been well advertised over the Nation. And I think it is about time that a presentation be made to show that the Attorney General is not altogether free from error in his views with respect to these bills.

Senator KEFAUVER. Will the Senator yield?

Senator ERVIN. Yes.

Senator KEFAUVER. I want to make it clear to the Senator from North Carolina that I am anxious to hear his statement, and there is no intention on my part to not have him make his full statement.

And, looking over the Attorney General's statement, it seems to be somewhat different in some respects to the statement he had made before other committees.

We make our own record in this committee. I thought as a matter of orderly procedure, particularly since it had been announced that way, that the Attorney General makes his statement, and then those of us who had any affirmative or critical remarks

Senator ERVIN. Yes. I can assure the Senator I am going to attempt to proceed in an orderly fashion in presenting my views in respect to this bill.