The Civil Rights Commission should never have been brought into existence. It has been most prejudiced in its viewpoint, and has fomented trouble and racial disturbance since its inception. It should be abolished, not extended.
This bill, by vesting the power to withhold or terminate Federal funds, creates a concentration of power of economic coercion unequaled in the history of governments—a power concentration which defies the experience of mankind with the temptation of power to corrupt.
The two portions of this bill to which I have constantly and consistently voiced objections, and which are of such overriding significance that they are determinative of my vote on the entire measure, are those which would embark the Federal Government on a regulatory course of action with regard to private enterprise in the area of so-called public accommodations and in the area of employment—to be more specific, titles II and VII of the bill. I find no constitutional basis for the exercise of Federal regulatory authority in either of these areas; and I believe the attempted usurpation of such power to be a grave threat to the very essence of our basic system of government; namely, that of a constitutional republic in which 50 sovereign States have reserved to themselves and to the people those powers not specifically granted to the Central or Federal Government.
This is an unprecedented threat to American traditions, and is aimed at forcing civil rights compliance in the South by authorizing the cutting off of funds in all financial assistance programs. Procedures in the title are devoid of due process of law. It states too broad a policy without defining ‘discrimination.’ Moreover, it authorizes an alternative court enforcement to bureaucrats who pronounce regulations approved by the President, whereas these matters should be promulgated, if at all, by act of Congress.
By its attempt to regulate and govern the private businesses, which are miscalled public accommodations in the bill, this proposal would inject the Government into the most sensitive areas of human contractual relations—agreements for personal services. In so doing, constitutional interpretations of long standing are being swept aside in favor of tortuous rationalizations which studiously ignore the constitutionally-forbidden imposition of involuntary servitude on citizens
The broadly and vaguely worded administrative and enforcement provisions of [the bill] would authorize extensive governmental intervention in labor-management relations far exceeding the purported evils at which this legislation is allegedly directed. Such provisions, moreover, effectively give the Secretary and his agents an unlimited license to destroy the wage structures which both management and labor have worked for years to develop….The exercise of such unlimited powers could not but grievously and irreparably injure labor management relations throughout the Nation.
The people of each state, and they alone, are best qualified to judge whether conditions in their own jurisdiction are such that there is social need for an equal pay law….Any view that only the Federal Government can handle this problem shows a distrust of the States and indicates an unfortunate trend toward creating an over-centralized, top-heavy government by bringing all problems to Washington.
[The bill would give the government] sweeping powers over industry [and make the secretary of labor] PROSECUTOR, JUDGE, AND JURY.
[We stand] with those who would eliminate injustice and inequality wherever it may exist….[But] We do not wish to see Federal legislation enacted which could create greater problems and bring about greater injustices.
It would give the Secretary of Labor vast new powers over private industry with authority to investigate complaints, conduct hearings, issue orders, regulations and interpretation, and initiate legal actions to enforce complaints. Moreover, it would project Government into the job evaluation process—a prerogative traditionally reserved to management.
