The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is like a long-forgotten song. Some of the words occasionally come to mind, and you might remember a few bars of the melody. But it fades away again, retreating to the recesses of your memory.
For all it’s worth in 2004, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (CRA) is probably obsolete. A high point of the Civil Rights movement, the CRA has become irrelevant, thanks to the existence of skin color preferences hiding behind “affirmative action.” Ambitious in purpose and far-reaching in scope, the CRA was not quite impressive enough for social engineers.
This month marks the 40th anniversary of the CRA, although it barely registered in the media, unlike the 50th anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education. The legislation had its beginning in the post-Civil War amendments, which sought to protect the rights of newly-freed slaves. The 14th amendment was enacted to combat the “black codes”, laws designed to specifically limit the freedom of blacks; however, the rights of blacks were a low priority during the early part of the 20th century.
During the World War II era, civil rights enforcement picked up speed. By executive order in 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt outlawed discrimination in the nation’s military forces, federal employment and defense-related industries.
By 1954, legal segregation was dismantled, but the decision became a justification for unconstitutionally forced busing and racial bean counting in public schools. After the passage of the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, which didn’t go far enough, demands for comprehensive civil rights laws began to grow louder.
On June 11, 1963, President John F. Kennedy went on national television and asked Congress to consider drafting legislation dealing with racial discrimination in public accommodations, federally-assisted programs and other areas. Ironically, one hundred years earlier, President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation.
President Kennedy, who didn’t live to see the bill’s passage, sought bipartisan support but failed to achieve it from the southern wing of the Democratic party. On February 10, 1964, the CRA passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 290-130. After a record two-month filibuster (in which Sen. Robert Byrd spoke 14 hours straight against the bill), a cloture vote ended the debate. Nine days later, the CRA passed the Senate 73-27. The bill was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on July 2, 1964.
Because the drafters were concerned that the CRA might be misinterpreted to require or permit race preferences, Congress added this amendment: “Nothing contained in [Title VII] shall be interpreted to require any employer…to grant preferential treatment to any individual or to any group because of the race, color, religion sex or national origin of such individual or group.”
“Affirmative action” was benign in the beginning. The term was first used in a 1961 Executive Order by President Kennedy, which instructed federal contractors to take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are treated equally “without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” President Johnson followed up with a similar order in 1965. Contractors were encouraged to cast a wider recruitment net to include more qualified minorities in the hiring pool.
But something went amiss. A Republican, President Richard M. Nixon, opened the door to racial quotas when he authorized the U.S. Department of Labor to set specific goals and timetables to correct the “underutilization” of blacks by federal contractors. Affirmative Action became nothing more than a racial spoils system, undermining the very intent and purpose of the CRA and the constitutional ideals upon which it is based.
The real challenge is improving skills and providing equal opportunity—not outcome—for all, instead of taking the easy way out by setting different standards for different groups. As long as skin color preferences exist, the promise of the CRA is a song still unsung.