VOTING RIGHTS

THURSDAY, APRIL 1, 1965

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE No. 5 OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY,
Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Emanuel Celler (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Celler, Rodino, Rogers of Colorado, Brooks, Corman, McCulloch, Cramer, and Lindsay.

Also present: Representatives Whitener, Edwards, Hungate, Tenzer, Conyers, King, and McClory.

Staff members present: Benjamin L. Zelenko, counsel, and Allan D. Cors, associate counsel.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order.

The chairman wishes to announce the following. Up until this morning we have had 12 hearing sessions on voting rights bills, taking testimony from approximately 41 witnesses who appeared before the subcommittee in person..

These figures do not include statements which were submitted for insertion in the record. The chairman hopes to conclude the hearings this morning.

Our first witness this morning is Mr. Roy Wilkins, executive director of the NAACP, who returns for further testimony.

Mr. Wilkins.

STATEMENT OF ROY WILKINS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, NEW YORK, N.Y., ACCOMPANIED BY JOSEPH RAUH, LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL

Mr. WILKINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It may be recalled that on March 23, when the committee was kind enough to hear my original testimony delivered in behalf of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the committee requested that we submit language to cover the suggestions for strengthening or amending H.R. 6400.

We have prepared that language touching on each of the points raised and are prepared to submit it this morning.

If the chairman wishes, since it is not extensive, I would be happy to read it or to submit it, whatever the chairman wishes.

The CHAIRMAN. We will place the full statement in the record.

(Document referred to follows:)

AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL RIGHTS TO H.R. 6400

I. POLL TAX

(i) Leadership conference testimony March 24, 1965 urged:

"(1) The total elimination of the poll tax as a restriction on voting in state and local elections as well as in federal elections."

(ii) Suggested language for proposed amendment :

"On line 6, page 6, delete all of section 5(e) and on line 13, page 11, insert a new section as follows: 'Section 12. No State or political subdivision shall deny or deprive any person of the right to register or to vote because of his failure to pay a poll tax or any other tax or payment as a precondition of registration or voting.' Renumber sections 12 and 13."

(iii) This amendment would have the effect of abolishing the poll tax in Mississippi, Alabama, Virginia, and Texas (Arkansas has already passed a constitutional amendment authorizing the abolition of the poll tax and an implementing statute is expected promptly).

II. APPLYING DIRECTLY TO FEDERAL EXAMINER

(i) Leadership conference testimony on March 24, 1965 urged:

"(2) The elimination of the requirement in the bill that a prospective registrant must first go before the state official to attempt to register before going to the Federal registrar or examiner. The prospective registrant ought not to be put to the delays, the hardships, and the indignity of attempting to satisfy hostile state officials before he can come to the Federal registrar." (ii) Suggested language for proposed amendment:

"On line 19, page 4, change the comma after the word 'vote' to a period and delete the remainder of section 5(a).”

(iii) This amendment would have the effect of permitting an applicant for registration to go directly to the Federal examiner without first having to try out the State authorities.

III. EXPANDED COVERAGE

(i) Leadership Conference testimony on March 24, 1965 urged:

"(3) Extended coverage of the registrar or examiner provisions of the bill, so that persons who have been wrongfully denied the right to vote, regardless of their geographical location, will have the benefits of these provisions of the legislation."

(ii) Suggested language for proposed amendments:

"On line 19, page 3, after the word 'residents' insert '(i)' and on line 20, page 3, after the words 'section 3(a)' insert the following: 'or (ii) of a political subdivision with respect to which the Director of the Census has certified to the Attorney General that the number of persons of any race or color who were registered to vote on November 1, 1964 was less than 25 percent of the number of all persons of such race or color of voting age residing in such subdivision,' "On line 15, page 4, insert a new subsection as follows: '(c) Whenever the Attorney General receives complaints in writing from 20 or more residents of a political subdivision not covered by the provisions of section 4(a), alleging that they have been denied the right to vote under color of law by reason of race or color and he believes such complaints to be meritorious, the Attorney General shall appoint a hearing officer to hold a hearing and determine whether there exists in such political subdivision a pattern or practice of denial of the right to vote on account of race or color. Whenever the Attorney General certifies that a hearing officer has determined that such a pattern or practice does exist in such political subdivision, the Civil Service Commission shall appoint examiners for such subdivision in accordance with section 4(a). The determination of the hearing officer shall be reviewable in a three-judge district court convened in the District of Columbia in an action for declaratory judgment against the United States by the affected political subdivision or by one or more of the 20 residents making the original complaint. The findings of the hearing officer if supported by substantial evidence shall be conclusive. There shall be no stay of any action of the examiners appointed by the Civil Service Commission unless and until the said three-judge district court shall determine that the findings of the hearing officer are not supported by substantial evidence.'"

(iii) These amendments would have the effect of broadening the coverage of H.R. 6400. While leaving intact the excellent automatic provisions of the administration bill covering Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Georgia, Virginia, South Carolina and 34 counties of North Carolina, they would provide for examiners in other political subdivisions if :

(1) less than 25 percent of a racial group were registered on November 1, 1964 and 20 residents complained to the Attorney General that they had been denied the right to vote. or

(2) 20 residents in any subdivision complained to the Attorney General that they had been denied the right to vote and a hearing officer found, after hearing, that there is a pattern or practice of discrimination in such subdivision.

IV. PREVENTING INTIMIDATION

(i) Leadership conference testimony March 24, 1965 urged: "(4) Further and maximum protection of registrants and voters both those who will be registered under the bill and those already registered, and prospective registrants, from all economic and physical intimidation and coercion. In extending such protection, the Federal Government should use the full range of its powers, criminal, civil, and economic, to protect the citizens from the beginning of registration process until his vote has been cast and counted." (ii) Suggested language for proposed amendments:

"On line 16, page 7 delete the entire section 7, and substitute the following: 'Section 7 No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall fail or refuse to permit a person to vote whose name appears on a list transmitted in accordance with section 5(b), or is otherwise qualified to vote, or fail or refuse to count such person's vote, or intimidate, threaten or coerce any person for registering or attempting to register, or assisting one registering or attempting to register, or for voting or attempting to vote under the authority of this Act or otherwise,'

"On line 14, page 10, insert a new subsection as follows: '(g) Whoever shall deprive or attempt to deprive any person of any right secured by section 2 or 3 or who shall violate section 7 shall be subject to a civil penalty in the amount of $500 for each act of deprivation, or violation, or attempt. Such penalty shall be collected on behalf of the affected individual by a civil action, brought by the United States in the District court for the district in which such act, violation, or attempt occurs or in the district in which the person responsible for such act, violation, or attempt is found. In any action brought hereunder involving any person acting under color or law who is in the employment of any State or political subdivision, said State or political subdivision shall be jointly liable and shall be made a party.''

“On line 14, page 8, add the following at the end thereof: 'If the life of any person is placed in jeopardy, he shall be fined not more than $20,000 or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.'

"On line 2, page 9, add the following at the end thereof: 'If the life of any person is placed in jeopardy, he shall be fined not more than $20,000 or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.'

"On line 14, page 10, insert a new subsection as follows: '(g) Whenever an examiner has been appointed under this Act for any political subdivision, the Attorney General may assign representatives of the Department of Justice, including agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and United States Marshals, to observe any registration of voters, the conduct of any election, and the tabulation of votes at any election in such political subdivision. Such representatives shall be entitled to enter and to remain in any registration or voting place, or place where votes are tabulated. No person shall interfere with or refuse to admit to any such registration, or voting or tabulation place any representative of the Department of Justice. Any person who shall violate this provision shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. In addition, the Attorney General may institute for the United States, or in the name of the United States, an action for preventive relief, including an applicaion for a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order or other order, enjoining violations of this subsection.'"

If the earlier suggestion of a civil penalty is adopted as subsec. (g), this would, of course, become subsec. (h).

(iii) These amendments would have the effect of broadening the prohibition on intimidation to cover all registrants and voters, provide for a $500 civil penalty for victims of acts of intimidation, increase penalties for violations of the act where life is placed in jeopardy, and provide for FBI agents and U.S. marshals to observe registration, voting, and counting.

(The above constitute the substantive amendments agreed upon by the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights to strengthen the bill. A number of language and technical suggestions are being made to the Justice Department and we would appreciate an opportunity to discuss these suggestions with committee counsel.)

The CHAIRMAN. You might give us the epitome of these observations. Mr. WILKINS. Yes.

The first suggestion was to eliminate the poll tax in all elections and our language to support that is as follows:

"On line 6, page 6, delete all of section 5 (e); and on line 13, page 11, insert a new section to read as follows: Section 12. No State or political subdivision shall deny or deprive any person of the right to register or to vote because of his failure to pay a poll tax or any other tax or payment as a precondition of registering or voting." Renumber the present sections 12 and 13.

On the second point, Mr. Chairman, that is the point applying to the Federal examiners or registrars, we recommended that the applicant be enabled to go directly to such registrar and our suggested language is:

On line 19, page 4, change the comma after the word "vote" to a period and delete the remainder of section 5(a).

That means, sir, that this amendment would have the effect of permitting an applicant for registration to go directly to the Federal examiner without first having to try out the State authorities.

Then, sir, the next recommendation was on the expanded coverage of the bill and here the committee raised some questions and asked for language, and the language covers a page of typing.

On line 19, page 3, after the word "residents" insert "(i)" and on line 20, page 3, after the words "section 3(a)" insert the following: "or (ii) of a political subdivision with respect to which the Director of the Census has certified to the Attorney General that the number of persons of any race or color who were registered to vote on November 1, 1964, was less than 25 percent of the number of all persons of such race or color of voting age residing in such subdivision.” On line 15, page 4, insert a new subsection as follows: "(c) Whenever the Attorney General receives complaints in writing from twenty or more residents of a political subdivision not covered by the provisions of section 4(a), alleging that they have been denied the right to vote under color of law by reason or race or color and he believes such complaints to be meritorious, the Attorney General shall appoint a hearing officer to hold a hearing and determine whether there exists in such political subdivision a pattern or practice of denial of the right to vote on account of race or color."

Whenever the Attorney General certifies that a hearing officer has determined that such a pattern or practice does exist in such political subdivision, the Civil Service Commission shall appoint examiners for such subdivision in accordance wth section 4(a).

The determination of the hearing officer shall be reviewable in a three-judge District Court convened in the District of Columbia in an action for declaratory judgment against the United States by the affected political subdivision or by one or more of the twenty residents making the original complaint. The findings of the hearing officer if supported by substantial evidence shall be conclusive. There shall be no stay of any action of the examiners appointed by the Civil Service Commission unless and until the said three-judge district court shall determine that the findings of the hearing officer are not supported by substantial evidence.

The CHAIRMAN. Apparently you have written a whole new bill Mr. Wilkins, or Mr. Rauh has.

Mr. WILKINS. It is not a new bill, it is a new section, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. It will make our work very complicated and extremely difficult. For example, your suggestion the language on page 19 after the word "residents", to insert the following:

or (ii) of a political subdivision with respect to which the Director of the Census has certified to the Attorney General that the number of persons of any race or color who were registered,

and so forth, there are no such statistics available. We do not have statistics like that.

Mr. WILKINS. It was our feeling, Mr. Chairman

The CHAIRMAN: You should have known that. We have no statistics of that sort, as has been testified.

Mr. RAUH. We think such information can be obtained.

The CHAIRMAN. On doomsday. We want to get action on this, Mr. Wilkins.

Mr. RAUH. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I recognize that but let us say it presents a difficulty.

The CHAIRMAN. The difficulty is that if we wait until we get those figures it would probably take an endless length of time and then we would be charged with delaying. Our action must be direct and immediate.

Mr. WILKINS. Well, Mr. Rauh has a comment on this, also.

The CHAIRMAN. I have great respect for Mr. Rauh, but sometimes he is a stargazer, and that is a creditable term. But we must be practical.

Mr. WILKINS. Mr. Chairman, may I interject here, for just one observation.

While conceding that this may not be an easy matter and subject to some delay, the fact that we do not now have this information is because we have never requested it or made it a part of any legislative requisition. That is, nobody has bothered to compile this or to take the trouble to look it up.

Mr. ROGERS. Will the Chairman yield?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, certainly.

Mr. ROGERS. As you recall last year or in 1963, Subcommittee No. 5 voted a strong civil rights bill which a lot of people backed away from. In that bill we provided for a census breakdown. When that was submitted to the Bureau of the Census they came up with an answer that it would take $87 million to get that information.

Now whether they are right or whether they are wrong, that is what we ran into last time. If you take what you suggest, the 25 percent number, the only statistics they have is as to probably race, color, and so on. They do not have them as to age, broken down as I understand it, in anything other than a county.

Now, it takes some time, as they pointed out, for us to get that information so that we had to back away from it. Is that your remembrance of it, Mr. Wilkins?

Mr. WILKINS. Mr. Rogers, I can appreciate this and of course $87 million is $87 million, if it costs that much.

Mr. ROGERS. I am only telling you what they told me.