Would it surprise you to know that, according to CNN, “More Republicans voted in favor of the Civil Rights Act than Democrats”? Would it also surprise you to know that Democrats were responsible for a filibuster against passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that “consumed fifty-seven working days”? This revelation runs contrary to everything I’ve ever been told about the Civil Rights Act. The question is: why? I would submit that the answers are twofold: Bias by commission, and bias by omission. At the conclusion of the exploration of my thesis, we will both share a sound understanding and appreciation for the contribution of conservative Republicans to what author Clay Risen terms “the single most important piece of legislation passed by Congress in American history.” With that being said, let’s begin our journey on what promises to be an intellectually edifying reexamination of American history that will conclude with important lessons for the future.
Todd S. Purdum, author of An Idea Whose Time Has Come, explains that “Most people don't realize that today at all -- in proportional terms, a far higher percentage of Republicans voted for this bill than did Democrats…[emphasis added]” Historically, what has the Democratic Party done so right, and the Republican Party done so wrong, that today many naturally assume that Democrats have always championed Civil Rights? Brent Baker of the Media Research Center explains that Bias by Commission is "A pattern of passing along assumptions or errors that tend to support a left-wing or liberal view." This can also be true for conservatives and conservative media. Baker goes on to provide an example of bias by commission: "In May 1993, CBS reporter Terence Smith charged: 'In 1989, after nearly a decade of federal cutbacks for immunizations, the previously successful measles vaccination program broke down.' A quick check by the MRC with the Centers for Disease Control revealed that spending actually rose from $32 million in 1980 to $186 million in 1990, and then up to $257 million in 1992." In short, bias by commission is lying. Now allow me to provide an example of bias by commission with respect to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In October 0f 2011, Al. Sharpton was on The Last Word With Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC when he said that the Democratic "Party...stood up for the Civil Rights Act of '64 and Voting Rights Act of '65. There's a reason blacks did not stay with the Republican Party." With respect to the aforementioned Voting Rights Act of 1965, "94 percent of Senate Republicans voted in favor of the bill versus 73 percent of Democrats." The uninformed layman tuning in would take for granted that more Democrats supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than Republicans, when just the opposite has been firmly established.
Earlier I posed the question, "Historically, what has the Democratic Party done so right, and the Republican Party done so wrong, that today many naturally assume that Democrats have always championed Civil Rights?" My first answer centered around bias by commission. Now I would like to focus on my second answer to this question, which is bias by omission. To explain my answer, I will start by using an excellent piece of research on media bias by Dr. Tim Groseclose and Dr. Jeffrey Milyo published in Harvard's Quarterly Journal of Economics, the top peer-reviewed economics journal at Harvard, entitled A Measure of Media Bias. The authors explain that "for every sin of commission," (Al Sharpton in our case) "we believe that there are hundreds, and maybe thousands, of sins of omission—cases where a journalist chose facts or stories that only one side of the political spectrum is likely to mention (pp. 16) [emphasis added]." Simply put, this is leaving critical information out. To realize this, one need only flip to the section on the Civil Rights Act of 1964/Voting Rights Act of 1965 in any high school or college American history textbook. Author Michael Zak explains that "Democrat pundits pretend that the 1964 Civil Rights Act was the creation of the Kennedy or Johnson administrations, but in fact it was an extension of the Republican Party’s 1957 and 1960 Civil Rights Acts..." However, Fred Lucas of The Blaze explains that Time "largely credited Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-Ill.) for pushing the sweeping legislation through, putting him on the cover [instead of LBJ] after final passage." 
Former George Mason University law professor Horace Cooper explains that "it was clear [that] distinguished leaders of the Democratic Party were the opponents" of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Of the small number of Republicans who did not vote for the Civil Rights Act, "The basis of most Republican opposition ...was discomfort about forcing private business to comply with public accommodation laws. [George Mason University law professor Horace] Cooper said few Republicans expressed any qualms about requiring public buses, and government buildings to integrate." The same cannot be said of the Democratic Party. To block the Civil Rights Act, Democrats "used a herculean effort to block it through filibusters.”
As our journey reexamining this important chapter of American history together comes to an end, I find myself asking, “What can I do? What can we do?” To answer that question, I would submit to you that the Republican Party must always approach the conversation from the perspective of preserving and promoting civil rights, defined as “The rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality.” As a Bill of Rights is defined as “A formal declaration of the legal and civil rights of the citizens of any state, country, federation, etc,” it follows that defending the Second Amendment, for example, is a defense of civil rights. With respect to abortion, the left tolerates, and in many cases condones, the destruction of the life and liberty of the unborn. They would deny the Civil Rights of the unborn child, globally most of whom are girls. How, then, can one claim to be a either a feminist, or a Civil Rights champion with such views? With respect to gun control, many so-called civil rights champions do not recognize its’ historically racist foundation. Case in point: “[Democrat] Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Taney...stressed in his [1857] Dred Scott v. Sandford opinion that if African-Americans could be admitted as citizens in any state, ‘It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right … to keep and carry arms wherever they went.’” Such an astonishing conclusion’s foundation is racism and fear, not the scholarly empiricism necessary for sound public policy that is conducive to liberty. The Republican Party stands guilty of no such crime. A simple truth arises: The face of the Republican Party must reclaim blacks, women, and minorities or face extinction. The way to regain their support is to constantly to remind them of our history’s excellent record on Civil Rights. Additionally, blacks and women can make arguments that whites and males simply cannot, and are an invaluable asset within the party. What should form the perimeter of our principles is equality before the law. We should reject the bankrupt notion of radical egalitarianism that the many on the left put forward. We must be, as Abraham Lincoln so eloquently put it, “dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”
As our journey reexamining this important chapter of American history together comes to an end, I find myself asking, “What can I do? What can we do?” To answer that question, I would submit to you that the Republican Party must always approach the conversation from the perspective of preserving and promoting civil rights, defined as “The rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality.” As a Bill of Rights is defined as “A formal declaration of the legal and civil rights of the citizens of any state, country, federation, etc,” it follows that defending the Second Amendment, for example, is a defense of civil rights. With respect to abortion, the left tolerates, and in many cases condones, the destruction of the life and liberty of the unborn. They would deny the Civil Rights of the unborn child, globally most of whom are girls. How, then, can one claim to be a either a feminist, or a Civil Rights champion with such views? With respect to gun control, many so-called civil rights champions do not recognize its’ historically racist foundation. Case in point: “[Democrat] Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger Taney...stressed in his [1857] Dred Scott v. Sandford opinion that if African-Americans could be admitted as citizens in any state, ‘It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right … to keep and carry arms wherever they went.’” Such an astonishing conclusion’s foundation is racism and fear, not the scholarly empiricism necessary for sound public policy that is conducive to liberty. The Republican Party stands guilty of no such crime. A simple truth arises: The face of the Republican Party must reclaim blacks, women, and minorities or face extinction. The way to regain their support is to constantly to remind them of our history’s excellent record on Civil Rights. Additionally, blacks and women can make arguments that whites and males simply cannot, and are an invaluable asset within the party. What should form the perimeter of our principles is equality before the law. We should reject the bankrupt notion of radical egalitarianism that the many on the left put forward. We must be, as Abraham Lincoln so eloquently put it, “dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”
Original House Version
|
Democrats
|
Republicans
|
For
|
152 (61%)
|
138 (80%)
|
Against
|
96 (39%)
|
34 (20%)
|
Cloture in the Senate
|
Democrats
|
Republicans
|
For
|
44 (66%)
|
27 (82%)
|
Against
|
23 (34%)
|
6 (18%)
|
Senate Version
|
Democrats
|
Republicans
|
For
|
46 (69%)
|
27 (82%)
|
Against
|
21 (31%)
|
6 (18%)
|
Senate Version, Voted on By House
|
Democrats
|
Republicans
|
For
|
153 (63%)
|
136 (80%)
|
Against
|
91 (37%)
|
35 (20%)
|
Quick Facts
- "A far higher percentage of Republicans voted for this bill [Civil Rights Act of 1964] than did Democrats"
- On the Voting Rights Act of 1965, "94 percent of Senate Republicans voted in favor of the bill versus 73 percent of Democrats."
No comments:
Post a Comment