Are the Democrats Historically the Party of Civil Rights?
from 
JoeUser Forums
JoeUser Forums
OK, I have been challenged on another thread in my assertion that the Republicans were the frontrunners in the civil rights movement, rather than the Democrats. What follows are statements from an article from "the National Review" on January 9, 2003 written by John Fonte and entitled "Conservatives Can be Proud of their Civil Rights Record". While one can challenge the editorial slant of the piece, the congressional votes are a matter of public record and can be verified with relative ease. I will quote the article where applicable...
"In the 1950s, while Republican President Dwight Eisenhower sent troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, to enforce the Supreme Court's school-desegregation ruling, Senator John Sparkman of Alabama (Democrat presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson's former vice-presidential running mate) protested this desegregation decision by signing the congressional "Southern Manifesto" attacking the court's ruling. In 1957 the Eisenhower administration, led by Republican Attorney General Herbert Brownell, steered through Congress the first civil-rights bill since Reconstruction. In that fight over protecting voting rights, veteran civil-rights lobbyist Harry L. Kingman described Republican Senate Leader William Knowland of California (a strong conservative) as a "key man in the victory." Clearly, Republican leader Knowland took a stronger pro-civil-rights stand than Democrat Senate Leader Lyndon Johnson of Texas, who at the time was accused by some civil-rights groups of introducing amendments that weakened the bill. "
In the question of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Fonte notes "bipartisan support", but mentions the following in response to the praise that has historically been heaped on the Democratic Party for passage of the bill:
"However, much of the hard work of advancing the legislation was done by congressional Republicans — conservative stalwarts including Everett McKinley Dirksen of Illinois, Charles Halleck of Indiana, William McCulloch of Ohio, Robert Griffin of Michigan, Robert Taft Jr. of Ohio, Clarence Brown of Ohio, Roman Hruska of Nebraska, and moderates such as Thomas Kuchel of California, Kenneth Keating of New York, and Clark MacGregor of Minnesota. All of these Republicans served as major leaders of the pro-civil-rights coalition either as floor managers or captains for different sections of the bill."
Fonte also goes on to note that, although both houses of Congress were controlled by the Democrats, a larger percentage of Republicans (136-35, a 79% majority) than Democrats (153-91, a 63% margin) in the House supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
In the infamous filibuster of the act, a 2/3 majority vote was needed to break the filibuster. Republicans voted 21-6, or 81.1% to break the filibuster, while the Democrats vote was 65.5%, or 44-23. Thus, if the Democrats' voting record decided the issue, the filibuster would have held and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would have failed.
There is more to this article that does not relate to my argument, which is that the Republicans have not historically been the civil rights villains they have often been portrayed to be, nor have Democrats historically been the civil rights heroes they have been portrayed to be. It IS revisionism to cast the Republicans as the villains in the Civil Rights battle and give undue credit to the Democrats. Earlier legislation in the 1950's actually shows a Democratic party that strongly OPPOSED Civil Rights legislation.
respectfully submitted,
Gideon MacLeish
"In the 1950s, while Republican President Dwight Eisenhower sent troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, to enforce the Supreme Court's school-desegregation ruling, Senator John Sparkman of Alabama (Democrat presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson's former vice-presidential running mate) protested this desegregation decision by signing the congressional "Southern Manifesto" attacking the court's ruling. In 1957 the Eisenhower administration, led by Republican Attorney General Herbert Brownell, steered through Congress the first civil-rights bill since Reconstruction. In that fight over protecting voting rights, veteran civil-rights lobbyist Harry L. Kingman described Republican Senate Leader William Knowland of California (a strong conservative) as a "key man in the victory." Clearly, Republican leader Knowland took a stronger pro-civil-rights stand than Democrat Senate Leader Lyndon Johnson of Texas, who at the time was accused by some civil-rights groups of introducing amendments that weakened the bill. "
In the question of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Fonte notes "bipartisan support", but mentions the following in response to the praise that has historically been heaped on the Democratic Party for passage of the bill:
"However, much of the hard work of advancing the legislation was done by congressional Republicans — conservative stalwarts including Everett McKinley Dirksen of Illinois, Charles Halleck of Indiana, William McCulloch of Ohio, Robert Griffin of Michigan, Robert Taft Jr. of Ohio, Clarence Brown of Ohio, Roman Hruska of Nebraska, and moderates such as Thomas Kuchel of California, Kenneth Keating of New York, and Clark MacGregor of Minnesota. All of these Republicans served as major leaders of the pro-civil-rights coalition either as floor managers or captains for different sections of the bill."
Fonte also goes on to note that, although both houses of Congress were controlled by the Democrats, a larger percentage of Republicans (136-35, a 79% majority) than Democrats (153-91, a 63% margin) in the House supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
In the infamous filibuster of the act, a 2/3 majority vote was needed to break the filibuster. Republicans voted 21-6, or 81.1% to break the filibuster, while the Democrats vote was 65.5%, or 44-23. Thus, if the Democrats' voting record decided the issue, the filibuster would have held and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would have failed.
There is more to this article that does not relate to my argument, which is that the Republicans have not historically been the civil rights villains they have often been portrayed to be, nor have Democrats historically been the civil rights heroes they have been portrayed to be. It IS revisionism to cast the Republicans as the villains in the Civil Rights battle and give undue credit to the Democrats. Earlier legislation in the 1950's actually shows a Democratic party that strongly OPPOSED Civil Rights legislation.
respectfully submitted,
Gideon MacLeish
PolMach Forums
I was only adding my opinions which I guess were not well recieved. 
Prove it you say? Why not you prove things that I say is wrong? Where you get your information from is the question I am not doubting you feelings on the subject. I am not a DEM or GOP supporter but thnigs did change with the parties as said in the article posted in the first place. Why your taking my comments as some sort of insult to you is beyond me. 