Mr. Speaker, on May 17, 1954, Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the shock that was felt across the Nation. This was done when, on behalf of a unanimous Supreme Court, he announced: ``We conclude…
Mr. Speaker, on May 17, 1954, Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the shock that was felt across the Nation.
This was done when, on behalf of a unanimous Supreme Court, he announced:
``We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of `separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.''
These 24 words, Mr. Speaker, had a far-reaching impact upon our Nation. These words ushered in an era of de jure desegregation that has changed the course of history that has created a new sense of destiny, and literally these 24 words opened doors that were closed to many persons and created new opportunities.
Mr. Speaker, before I go on, let me thank the many cosponsors of H. Res. 79, which recognizes the significance of Black History Month, and H. Res. 17, which honors the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the NAACP, on its 108th anniversary. I thank the many cosponsors and the many persons who have worked on these issues.
I have a staff that has worked tirelessly to make sure that we have these resolutions prepared, such that they could be filed timely. I am grateful to my staff. One such staff member is with me tonight. My legislative director, Ms. Amena Ross, is in the Chamber with me. I am appreciative that on Valentine's Day she has chosen to be here as opposed to where she probably could be and will probably be going shortly.
Mr. Speaker, given that in this month, the month of February, we celebrate Black history as well as the founding of the NAACP, I think that it is appropriate for me to speak on the topic from desegregation to resegregation. Mr. Speaker, it can happen.
Mr. Speaker, while Brown v. Board of Education has not produced the utopian society many hoped for--it has not ended the de facto segregation that many prayed for. It has not engendered the quality education for all children and has not transformed public schools into perfect schools or equal schools--I still contend and firmly believe that we are a much better nation with Brown v. Board of Education than without it.
Mr. Speaker, I think that it is important for us to give empirical evidence of these words that I have just spoken, my positions, if you will. I would like to do so by allowing the words of a Southern judge. I would like to allow his words to speak for themselves.
This is a message that was delivered by a Southern judge on October 4 of 1957. Mr. Speaker, I shall not call his name. I do not want to embarrass his family. But he was the vice president of a bar association. He was a circuit court judge. He received his BA from a prestigious institution, and he taught sociology.
Mr. Speaker, please hear now his words so that people may understand why Brown v. Board of Education was so important to so many in this country. These are his words:
``Segregation in the South is a way of life. It is the means whereby we live in social peace, order and security.''
Mr. Speaker, I trust that many people can understand why persons of my generation are concerned when we hear the terms ``law'' and ``order,'' terms that indicate law enforcement will take law into its own hands by some standards. In fact, there was law and order at the Edmond Pettus Bridge on
Bloody Sunday, but there was not justice at the Edmond Pettus Bridge.
Many people seek justice when they look for law enforcement to enforce and maintain order. They look for justice as well.
He goes on to say: ``Ninety-eight percent of both races prefer segregation.''
He is now speaking for people that we now call African Americans. At that time, they were called Negroes.
``Integration is urged by the NAACP, a few Southern mulattoes''--this is a means by which light-skinned African Americans were separated from the darker African Americans.
He says that `` . . . a few Southern mulattoes, Northern Communist- front organizations and left-wing labor groups who would use the unsuspecting Negro as their tool.''
It is remarkable that someone would think that people yearning to be free would see those who are lending a hand as persons who are using them as tools.
He goes on to say: ``It does not work any economic hardship nor deprive the Negro of any of his constitutional rights.''
He is talking about segregation.
Then he goes on to say: ``The Negro has made great strides and the Southern white man is largely responsible for these advancements.''
This is a judge. One can only imagine what it must have been like to appear before him if you were Black.
He goes on to say: ``If in the South the Negro was permitted, as he is in some Northern States, to obtain the ballot by simply reaching 21 years of age, it would mean that no qualified white man in many counties throughout the South could ever hold public office. It would also mean that in the halls of Congress, seats now held by competent white representatives would be held by ignorant, incompetent Negroes.''
These are the words of a judge shortly after the Brown decision.
He explains: ``An exhaustive study of the program and results of integration in the schools of Washington, D.C., which the NAACP and other left wing groups''--thank God for the NAACP and leftwing groups-- ``fostering integration said would be a model for the rest of the United States to follow, clearly reveals that the average white student who was integrated in the class room with the Negro has been retarded two to three years in his educational progress. Therefore, it is not to the best interest of America that the white children, particularly in certain congested sections, be retarded three years in their educational advancement.''
He then states later on in his speech that `` . . . we have already, by constitutional amendment, authorized our legislature as other Southern States will do, to abolish the public schools if the Negro and white children are ever integrated therein. Make no mistake about it, we will abolish our public school system and establish private schools for our white children, and we will still provide and see that the Negro is educated separately. It will cost dearly, but we will do it.''
Finally, he concludes with these words. This is a judge. These are facts in the sense that these are statements that he had made. The history is there for those who wish to read it.
He indicates that: `` . . . As long as we live, so long shall we be segregated, and after death, God willing, thus it will still be!''
Mr. Speaker, I call this to our attention because it is important for us to understand what the horrors of segregation were really like; that this was not something that persons of African ancestry enjoyed; that segregation caused many persons more than an inconvenience. It really cost a good many people their lives.
So I thank God, Mr. Speaker, for the NAACP, for labor unions, and for people of goodwill of all hues who worked hard to make sure we arrived at this point in our history.
I thank God for Brown v. Board of Education, but I also understand that the Brown case, Mr. Speaker, was as much about fate as it was about facts. I contend that, but for the intrusive hand of fate, the Brown decision could have been, at minimum, a partial endorsement of segregation.
Unfortunately, because the Chief Justice at that time, whose name I shall not mention--I need not embarrass his family--was a notorious supporter of the doctrine of segregation.
However, Mr. Speaker, after arguments were made in the Brown case in 1952, and before the decision was announced in 1954, fate intruded, and the Chief Justice suffered a heart attack from which he did not recover.
A conservative President then had the duty to appoint a man to the new seat as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. President Eisenhower appointed a man who participated in the World War II internment of Japanese Americans. This was Governor Earl Warren. He was appointed as the new Chief Justice. With this appointment, many persons thought that little would change on the Supreme Court. However, when Warren achieved a unanimous decision outlawing segregation, President Eisenhower is said to have stated that this was one of the biggest mistakes that he made by appointing Warren to the Supreme Court as his Chief Justice.
The Brown decision, Mr. Speaker, was little less than a minor miracle, and it has had a remarkable impact on our society. I probably stand here today because of the Brown decision. At the time the decision was rendered, there were two African Americans in Congress. Today we have approximately 50 African Americans in Congress.
The Brown decision has made a difference in the lives of people. Integration of schools has been of benefit to young people.
I have an article that I would like to read from. It is styled: ``The Benefits of Socioeconomically and Racially Integrated Schools and Classrooms.'' This is from the Century Foundation, a reputable organization.
In the general sense, here is what the article addresses:
It indicates that students in integrated schools have higher average test scores.
Students in integrated schools are more likely to enroll in college.
Students in integrated schools are less likely to drop out.
Integrated schools help to reduce racial achievement gaps.
Integrated classrooms encourage critical thinking, problem-solving, and creativity.
Attending a diverse school can help reduce racial bias and counter stereotypes.
Students who attend integrated schools are more likely to seek out integrated settings after they leave school and enter life.
Integrated classrooms can improve students' satisfaction and intellectual self-confidence.
Learning in integrated settings can enhance students' leadership skills.
Finally, of the many things--and I have not cited them all--diverse classrooms prepare students to succeed in a global economy.
Mr. Speaker, there is little question in my mind and in the minds of many that integration has made a difference in the lives of people in this country. Integration has not only been of benefit to us in classrooms, but the truth is that we live in a society wherein integration has allowed us, by virtue of Brown v. Board of Education, to sleep where we sleep, to eat where we eat, to live where we live.
Brown v. Board of Education has had far-reaching implications beyond that of the classroom. In fact, the economic order, the political order, and the social order were positively impacted by Brown.
So, Mr. Speaker, I want to make it clear that I believe we have to, in this country, protect the integration and desegregation that society has produced.
I see that I have another colleague present. Mr. Speaker, can you give me the amount of time that I have left?
I assure my colleague that I will provide ample time.
Continuing, Mr. Speaker, I am concerned about the re-segregation of our society. I believe that it can occur, and I believe that we must guard against it. I believe that the voucherization of public school funding has been and continues to be the enemy of desegregation and integration.
Allow me to explain. After the Brown decision, as I have indicated, many States sought to repeal the requirement that they maintain a public
school system, and many did. After the Brown decision, vouchers were seen as a means by which public schools could be privatized, so that the public school system would exist with private tax dollars that were in the form of vouchers, and would allow people to still go to the schools of their choice. ``School choice'' was one of the watchwords of the day.
After the Brown decision, in 1955, thereabouts, Milton Friedman, Nobel Laureate, proposed that vouchers be used to allow children to go to the schools of their choice, allow their parents to have this opportunity to send their children to the schools of their choice.
Mr. Speaker, these vouchers, had they been used as proposed, would have continued to perpetrate segregation and perpetuate it for years to come. These vouchers were not used, thank God. I regret to say, however, that many States are currently proposing voucher systems that can lead to the re-segregation of society.
We have a duty to protect the gains that have been made, that have been fought for by the NAACP, by labor unions, by people of goodwill of all hues. We have got a duty and an obligation to protect these gains, and not allow our country to slip back into a dark past that no one wants to relive.
I would hope, Mr. Speaker, that as we continue our progress, we will remember the past that we have been able to extricate ourselves from. And in so doing, it is my desire that we give special attention to these attempts to use tax dollars, to voucherize tax dollars so that public schools can be privatized with tax dollars, which can lead to separation, which can lead to the re-segregation of society.
At this time, Mr. Speaker, I have my colleague, the Honorable Jim Clyburn present from South Carolina. He is known as a historian par excellence. I am so honored to yield to him so that he may speak on the subjects related to Black history and the NAACP.
I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn).
I thank Mr. Clyburn for those wonderful comments. They were most edifying, and I am sure that a good many people have acquired a better understanding of Allen University.
Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
Mr. Speaker, I will simply say this in my last 2 minutes. I am grateful that the NAACP was there not only for me, but for this country. The NAACP filed and won many cases, but Brown v. Board of Education has to be one of the most outstanding pieces of litigation that it engaged in.
Of course, you can't talk about Brown without mentioning the Honorable Thurgood Marshall, who was the lead counsel in the Brown case who went on to become a Justice on the Supreme Court.
The Brown case has transformed American life. It desegregated and integrated American society, the economic order, and the political order as well. I am blessed to be here because of
Brown v. Board of Education, and my hope is that we will understand that desegregation and integration are here now--and we will fight for them--but we have to also understand that we can go from desegregation to resegregation. We must be careful, we must vigilant, and we must protect the gains that we have made.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
