[Statement of Representative John Lewis, D-Ga]
REP. LEWIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I am pleased and delighted to be here with you today.
When I was growing up in the rural south in the '40s and '50s, I saw for myself the evil system of segregation and discrimination. I was bussed long distances over unpaved roads, dusty in summer and muddy in winter, to attend overcrowded, poorly staffed segregated schools. For many blacks, they weren't called "high school" then; they were called "training school." An evil system, a way of life, had been built on a foundation of racism, greed, hatred and a denial of basic human needs and human rights. It was a closed society, and everywhere I turned I found closed doors. I saw those signs that said "white men," "colored men," those signs that said "white women," "colored women," those signs that said "white waiting," "colored waiting."
I am the son of sharecroppers. I grew up in a family with a mother and a father, six brothers and three sisters. We were very poor. The house in which we lived had no indoor plumbing or electricity. I read by the light of kerosene lamps. But that does not make me qualified to sit on the highest court of the land. If you want to vote to confirm Clarence Thomas to sit on the highest court of the land, you must have some reason other than the fact that he grew up poor in Pin Point, Georgia.
I also come here as one who participated in the civil rights movement of the '60s, as one who was beaten, arrested and jailed on more than 40 occasions. During the '60s, as I traveled and worked throughout the South, I saw civil rights workers and many people whom we were trying to help with their heads cracked open by night sticks, lying in the streets, weeping from tear gas, calling helplessly for Medicaid [medical aid]. I've seen old women and young children involved in peaceful non-violent protests, run down by policemen on horses, beaten back by fire hoses and chased by police dogs. But also during the '60s, we saw the front of a government and particularly the Supreme Court as a sympathetic referee in the struggle for civil rights.
I can recall on one occasion when the Supreme Court issued a decision dealing with public transportation. An elderly black woman was heard to say, "God Almighty has spoken from Washington." The Supreme Court was there for the people then. That is no longer the case.
Let us set aside for the moment Thomas' view on abortion, which he won't share with you, his views on affirmative action on which he had been incredibly unclear and his views on natural law which was one thing last year, something different when he was nominated and still something else at this hearing last week. Let us set aside all of this and see what you have. What you have is a nominee who wants to destroy the bridge that brought him over troubled waters. He wants to pull down the ladder that he climbed up. You have a nominee who have refused to answer your questions, a nominee who has defied the law, a nominee who ad tried to stonewall this committee, a nominee who changes his story to suit the audience, a nominee who is running from his record.
As elected officials, men who have to run, you have come up on men who run on their records and others who run from their record. Well, Clarence Thomas is a man who is running from his record. I ask you again: What reason do you have other than the fact that he grew up poor in Pin Point, Georgia to confirm Clarence Thomas' nomination to the Supreme Court? I know this is a tough decision for you to have to make. It was a tough decision for me to decide to come before you today.
(13:50)
I've been advised by some that I should not testify against Clarence Thomas because he is black. The color of Clarence Thomas' skin is not relevant. The person, his views and his qualifications are. Leadership demands that we not avoid decisions just because they are tough. It requires that we be fair, be critical and do what is right, not what may appear to be politically correct. You have information that the masters don't have. You know Clarence Thomas' record. You know the truth.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, as a member of the House, I don't want to tell you what to do, I can't. But I do want to say that you have a mission, a mandate and a moral obligation not just to our generation, but to unborn generations. The decision you make on the Thomas nomination will affect how we live well into the next century. You cannot vote to confirm Clarence Thomas unless you feel confident that Clarence Thomas will not bring his own agenda to the bench, that his decision will not be burdened with his own preconceived notion about how things are or should be. You must feel confident in your gut and, as he himself put it, Thomas is fair, full of integrity, open-minded and honest.
Look at his record. Listen to what he has said to you during this hearing. Hear what he has refused to say. You may have to sail against a current, but that's okay. I urge you to vote against the confirmation of Mr. Thomas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SENATOR BIDEN: Thank you very much, gentlemen. I know you've all used the phrase -- this is not easy for you to do. I suspect a lot of people think it was easy. I have some sense, some little sense of how hard it must be. You have all fought your entire lives to see to it that black women and men are in positions of power, positions of authority, be able to be role models to a generation of black children, and here you are walking down that long walk across from the other body to come in this great majestic room and tell a group of your colleagues on the Senate side don't vote for a man to the Supreme Court who is black, when not a one of you -- I don't want to reveal all of you ages -- but not a one of you fail to understand at some point in your life, the lash of legal segregation -- the notion that 20 years ago, 30 years ago, any one of you would be in this room saying "don't put any black person on the Supreme Court of the United States" would boggle the mind, and you're here. And as I said, I am confident what you say when you say it's not an easy decision.
Let me approach -- let me be the devil's advocate with you for a moment, if I may. Clarence Thomas and those who vociferously support Clarence Thomas say two things about the black leadership in America and the black leadership in the Congress, and you are the black leadership of the nation.
They say, number one, this really only reflects a difference on affirmative action. That's what this is all about. The only thing you all are concerned about is affirmative action. Clarence Thomas is hostile to affirmative action apparently, although I acknowledge, John, it's kind of hard to tell, and that's why you're here.
(13:55)
And the second thing they say is that any black man who has suffered the indignities and injustices of a legally segregated system as well as a system, in my view, that continues to be segregated, a much more sophisticated way these days, that person's instincts have got to be right when they get on the bench, that in the end, whether or not he calls himself a Republican or a Democrat, conservative or liberal, he'll do the right thing.
So the two big arguments that have been posited by supporters of Thomas and those who have been detractors of your position are: A, this is all about affirmative action and a desire for you to maintain the position of black leadership in the nation, your points of view; and, B, how could any black man with his background not do the right thing when it comes to race, issues relating to race.
Would any or all of you, please, comment for the record on both of those assertions that we've so many times?
REP. CONYERS: Mr. Chairman, might I comment on that --
SENATOR BIDEN: Congressman Conyers.
REP. CONYERS: -- and ask before we begin that all of our individual statements be submitted and reproduced in the record?
SENATOR BIDEN: They all will be, any statement that -- anything beyond what you've said and if you have as a statement, it will be placed in the record.
REP. CONYERS: Thank you very much. Of course, we've pointed out here in all of our testimony that this goes far beyond individual differences of how we approach civil rights, that we're talking about whether we have the confidence of whether he will apply the fundamental constitutional prerogatives in a way that are going to satisfy us far beyond affirmative action. We're talking about his conduct in nine years of public office that required him to come before Congress as many times as you've heard here today.
We're talking about the fact that senior citizens are aggrieved about the way he handled age discrimination cases. We're talking about the women's organizations, who are disturbed about where his views on privacy are going to lead. We don't know what's going to happen on natural law.
And so I think it's patently obvious that this is not a single issue or some truncated difference of view on one part of the civil rights issue that we take. It would be trivial of us to come forward on that kind of a question.
I also very firmly believe that what happens here in these next few weeks before your body are going to determine whether we ever come forward with an African-American nominee to replace Thurgood Marshall, and I think what we have to continue to watch very carefully is if he is confirmed, we are essentially closed down for Justice Marshall's representative. If he is not confirmed, I think the picture is open. We all know a long list of African- American jurists, male and female, with good constitutional experience and many others coming forward that could leave that picture open.
And so I urge that we not exceed to any notion that we're trivializing this confirmation process on a very narrow civil rights point.
SENATOR BIDEN: Yes, Congressman Stokes.
REP. STOKES: Mr. Chairman, at the expense of being redundant, I will -- I will forego speaking to Part A. I think many people feel that any person born black, subjected to racism, the other indignities that black people have been subjected to in this society, once they get on that Court, once they have that paper that says they have a lifetime appointment, will then feel secure and be able to do the right thing. And I guess I've tried in my own mind to analyze it and try and understand this individual in that space. And what I've had to do is try to look at his record.
One of the most poignant things that -- what I -- the fears I have about him is in a case called Moore (sp) vs. city of East Cleveland -- and I happened to represent East Cleveland. A 63 year old grandmother, who had taken in one of her grandchildren when he was less than a year old, when his mother died, was charged on an ordinance that defined family as being only the parents and their children. And in this home, this grandmother had taken in her own son and two grandchildren, one of whom was this one year old child when his mother died.
But they were not brothers, they were cousins. And under this particular statute she was ordered by the municipality to evict this child because the child did not fit the family definition under the ordinance. She refused to do so. And she was jailed and fined. The case went up to the United States Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court found that this was an invasion by the municipality of the privacy of family, and recognized the fact that -- in the black family particularly -- that there's a need for the extension of the family to take in other relatives, and so long as it does not break zoning laws, things of the nature, that this is in the course of American tradition, that other ethnic groups have had to do this when they came to this country and so forth.
Clarence Thomas was on a White House task force on the family. They issued a report highly critical of this particular Supreme Court decision, meaning, in effect, that they would have jailed the grandmother and permitted the fine to stand. And when I examined that case and his relation to it, and the fact that he signed this report criticizing it, I asked myself, how could this man, who in your hearings made so much to-do about his grandparents, and what they had done for him and his mother and for his family -- and in fact I dare say to you that you know more about his grandparents, Mr. Chairman, than you know about him. Because he talked over and over again about what his grandparents had done.
How then, you must say, can this same man then jail or want to have jailed this grandmother who took in her grandchild? I think when you look at this you get some answer to whether or not he'd really go back to his roots and do the right thing. I don't think he will.
SENATOR KENNEDY: My time's about up. But I wanted to give you gentlemen a chance to respond to this -- (inaudible.)
REP. OWENS: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman --
SENATOR BIDEN: Yes.
REP. OWENS: I would like to say that the record of Clarence Thomas with respect to affirmative action and civil rights is not subtle at all. It is not unclear at all, it is not mysterious at all. It is quite clear where he stands. He had eight years, and his performance in office -- the EEOC -- made it quite clear. And most African- Americans clearly understand this after they get over the shock of understanding that a person with his education and his position could espouse those ideas, the reaction is, you know, we're quite sorry but --
I'll tell you what one lady told me at church, "Let's take the Christian approach," she said. We want you Congressmen to go out there and fight as hard as you can to see that this man does not get a place on the Supreme Court. But since the President is powerful and we know that it's possible that you might lose, and he might be placed on the Supreme Court. After you get through fighting and you lose, then we'll start praying that he'll be born again and will act right when he gets on the Court. But fight first, and then we'll pray later.
REP. WASHINGTON: Very briefly, Mr. Chairman, on the first part of your question I'd like to rely upon my 20 years of experience as a trial lawyer, which I brought to this job. Whenever I was trying a murder case and I couldn't do much to get over all the facts that the prosecution had assimilated against me, I'd try the deceased person. That's an attempt to divert your attention from the issue by talking about all these organizations that have come out in opposition to him. If our focus was as narrow as a difference of opinion over affirmative action, as a trial lawyer, I believe that the true art of cross-examination would get to the truth in that, and you would be able to find it real soon.
We're not talking about our difference of opinion with him on affirmative action. We've talked about things that we think are a lot more important to the function that he is about to ascend to, with your permission. On the second point, to suggest that a black man who has suffered as much as he has will, quote, "Do the right thing," I find to be condescending -- both condescending and patronizing. If we set that up as the standard then, the Supreme Court ought to adopt it as a standard. And all these people who are suggesting that it is the right thing to do ought to adopt it as a standard.
That means that any time that a black person who is not qualified goes to apply for a job as a truck driver, instead of looking at whether he can drive a truck or not you'll see what kind of a background he came from. If you're applying for a job as a school teacher, if you're applying for a job as a US Senator, then you ought to be able to get out and campaign; "Well, I'm not as qualified as Senator Grassley. I'm not as adroit at the issues as Senator Grassley. But, by God, I come from humble beginnings, so, by God, give the job to me." That's ludicrous. It's ludicrous to suggest and it is condescending and black people don't like it a bit.
REP. LEWIS: Mr. Chairman, let me be just brief and say, as black members of the Congress, and as members of the Congress, we don't have anything to gain for coming here being against the confirmation of Clarence Thomas.
SENATOR BIDEN: Well said. I --
SENATOR SIMON: I know it is not my time, but I just got word I'm supposed to be over on the floor on an amendment that I have there. If I could just take one minute?
SENATOR BIDEN: Is that all right if he takes one minute out of order?
Would you all mind if he takes one minute out of order?
SENATOR THURMOND: No, go ahead.
SENATOR BIDEN: All right.
SENATOR SIMON: Yes, first of all, I really appreciate your testimony and your standing up. I served in the House with three of my colleagues here -- Congressman Conyers, Congressman Stokes, and Congressman Owens -- and I've known -- while I didn't serve in the House with Congressman Lewis, I've known him for many years.
One other factor, and that is, if I can go back to something that happened in Atlanta many years ago; you had two black leaders -- Frederick Douglas, who was an advocate, who said, "We ought to get the right to vote, we ought to have civil rights." You had another leader who brought himself up from the bootstraps, but who was an accommodator, who said, in what has been called the Atlanta Compromise Speech, -- Booker T. Washington said, "We ought to forget those things, we ought to just do the best job we can wherever we are." And the white majority ceased on Booker T. Washington's statements. And it was used not for the benefit of African- Americans. One of the things that we do here is we elevate someone who, up to this point, has been an accommodator rather than an advocate.
And I mentioned that in connection with this brief question. One of the arguments is used, and I hear from my friends in the African-American community, "If we don't -- I don't like Clarence Thomas's views. But if we don't take him, we're going to get somebody with the same views who's white. And we ought to have an African-American on the Court." Congressman Conyers has answered that in part by saying this, for all practical purposes, probably precludes another viewpoint from the African-American community on the Court. Is -- I'd be interested in how you would answer -- is the Booker T. Washington analogy a fair one or an unfair one?
REP. CONYERS: It is. Du Bois and Washington was the reference you were making to in the Atlanta compromise. And we hear that, "better to take a chance now and keep your fingers crossed, will he change?" And you know, I've never approached a confirmation process supporting someone that I didn't agree with and hoping they'd change. I go back to Haynsworth, Carswell, and on down the line up into Bork, and it makes no sense. And I think your accommodationist parallel that you draw, Senator Simon, has validity. As a matter of fact we had one of our great historians draw up comments for us that he submitted, in which he went back to that day and made a reference to the one quite similar to the one that you draw at this time.
REP. STOKES: Senator Simon, I can only say that -- in answer to the question that if you don't get Thomas that we probably will not get another black on the Court. And the only way to answer that is to say we will just have to be patient and wait our time. And the fact that if we don't get Thomas at this time we don't get -- rather a black at this time, then we will just have to be patient and wait. But it is as bad to have a bad appointee on there who is black as it is to have a bad appointee on there who is white. If Bork was wrong for the Court, Thomas is wrong for the Court. And you have to stand with that. You can't have a separate criteria.
REP. OWENS: Well, it's hard to believe, Senator, that there will ever be a situation where two blacks would be appointed to the Court. We just don't believe it's going to happen. As long as one is there, you're not likely to have another. And it is hard to believe that Judge Thomas will ever change very much. Because, as a member of the Reagan Administration, he was one of the most outspoken and belligerent of the executive branch team. And he, of course, has been promoted and sponsored by people who are deeply rooted in the conservative philosophy, which is directly opposed to the kind of principles and the kinds of ideas that are necessary for the advancement of the African-American people.
The likelihood that he's going to change and not be grateful to his sponsors and do something different is -- we find it hard to believe that it's going to happen. We find it hard to believe that we won't be placed in the position where a member of the Supreme Court occupying that position, which is quite an exalted one, will not be quoted extensively and used against us. You know, if I was in Moscow or London or some other part of the world and Judge Thomas made a statement and I made a statement in direct opposition to it, I would expect the people in London or Moscow or any other part of the world to automatically defer to Judge Thomas and assume that a judge on the Supreme Court speaks with more authority and has more credibility than a Congressman. And that's the way it's going to be. He is going to be in a position where he can do great harm to the things that we believe in and to the people that we represent.
REP. WASHINGTON: Senator, let me just add, in chess, as you know, there is a saying that if black moved first, black would most often win. Not because of the color, it doesn't matter what the colors are, but the piece that moves first in chess -- to similarly situation chess players playing -- the person who moves first is more likely to win than the other. Which comes to the question that you raise about, it seemed to me, about Judge Thomas.
I think the question is not whether -- if the Senate, in its wisdom, rejects this nomination, -- whether we're likely to get a white person or a Hispanic person or a woman or someone else. The question is whether he's qualified. But if you turn that question over, the other side is, if he were a white person, if he were a woman, if he were Hispanic, if he were anything other than black, with the paucity of qualifications that he brings with him and the grievances that have been unearthed at these hearings and before, is it any question that there would be a good deal of resentment and a good deal of opposition to him.
We've come too far. I don't mean black people, I mean all people. I mean America has come too far since the Civil War, since the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments. We didn't come all the way to here to say, when it comes down to it, that the color of the skin matters more than anything else. If he's not qualified, he's not qualified. And if he's not qualified, making him black doesn't make him qualified.
REP. LEWIS: Senator Simon, let me just respond by saying this man is very young. And if he's confirmed by the Senate, he will be on the Court for many, many years to come. He will emerge as a symbol, as a symbol for hundreds, for thousands and millions of African- Americans. Is this the symbol that we want as African- Americans?
The Supreme Court, during the '60s -- started in 1945 and during the '60s, created a climate and environment to make this country something different, something better. We don't want to go back.
SENATOR SIMON: I thank all of you and I thank Senator Thurmond for yielding.
SENATOR BIDEN: Thank you. Senator Thurmond.
SENATOR THURMOND: Thank you.
I want to welcome you all today to this hearing, not only as Democratic congressmen -- I believe you all are Democrats -- but also as prominent Democratic leaders.
I want to mention one thing about Congressman Stokes. Regarding the White House report, Judge Thomas testified that he contributed the housing section to this report, but that he did not endorse the other -- the whole report. So I thought I'd mention that for your information. I don't think you distinguished in your statement -- (inaudible) --
REP. LEWIS: No, Senator, I didn't. What I said was that he was on the White House Task Force on the Family and that he signed the report which criticized the Supreme Court for its ruling in that case and, in criticizing it, I could have said he also criticized Justice Marshall, because Justice Marshall was on the concurring opinion with Justice Brennan, but I -- I knew nothing about the housing section.
I do know that he said he didn't read the report. In your hearings here, he said that he just signed it. I do know that.
SENATOR THURMOND: Well, he said he had -- he did not endorse that whole report, I believe. I thought you ought to know that.
REP. LEWIS: Certainly.
SENATOR THURMOND: Now, I want to mention this to you. You all are Democrats. A great many of the black people now are joining the Republican Party, and I hope you respected their right to do that.
There's general feeling -- whether it's true or not is another question, but there's general feeling that black Democratic leaders prefer not to support a black for a high position unless his is a Democrat. There's a general feeling out there to that effect, and I just want to pass that along to you.
We're glad to have you here and thank you for coming.
(Laughter)
SENATOR BIDEN: Would you all like to say thank you in order?
(Laughter)
REP. WASHINGTON: I just -- I'd like to say I appreciate that, Senator, but I -- I would hope that you would take that with a grain of salt, quite frankly, from -- from those who make those statements. I -- I think you'll find, Senator, that we have at least always known that there is as wide a divergence of views and opinions in the black community as there is in any other community. It's just -- it just happens that most of the bulk of leaders in the '40s and '50s and '60s happen to have been associated with the Democratic Party.
We recognize that -- that President Lincoln was a Republican. Some of my best friends are Republicans.
(Laughter)
REP. WASHINGTON: We -- we look at -- we -- we have been trained, Senator, because most of our lives and most of us are old enough, without telling our ages, that most of our life, we have had to confront racism in many forms. It has become more sophisticated now, but -- but we recognize that we would be the last people on earth to put people in a group, because prejudice means prejudgment based upon group identification.
We don't look at Republicans as being Republicans. We look at the carriage of the individual. I -- I count among some of my best friends and some of the people that I admire the most Republicans who I consider to be champions of civil rights, like Senator Specter, and I'm just saying -- because, you see, I've been watching him on television. Senator Hatch and I disagree on a lot of things, but I think we consider ourselves friends.
Don't listen to those who tell you that we're trying to keep down the movement. We want many blacks to be involved in the Republican Party. We want every black person to vote. We're not like those who discourage people from going to the polls to vote. We think the best democracy is one in which all people participate.
SENATOR THURMOND: I hope you're associating more with your Republican friends. They may win you over yet.
REP. WASHINGTON: (Laughs) They've got their work cut out for them, Senator.
SENATOR THURMOND: I want -- I want to say this -- (laughter) -- I think it's to the advantage of the black people of this country to be in both parties. For years and years, the south was solidly Democratic. We got no attention from Democrats. They had us in the bag. We got not attention from the Republicans because they knew they couldn't get us.
I think it's to the advantage of your people that you have blacks in both parties, and in that way, I think you'll get more attention than ever. We're glad to have you here.
REP. WASHINGTON: Thank you, sir.
SENATOR BIDEN: Senator Hatch.
SENATOR HATCH: Well, I just want to welcome all of you here. I -- I just got back from being out in my home state with the president and just came in, but I wanted to at least come up to say hello. But we're happy to have your testimony and -- and I'm a little disappointed that it -- that it isn't more favorable to Judge Thomas, but each of you is a friend and I -- and I have great admiration for you, so I don't have any questions.
SENATOR BIDEN: Thank you very much, Senator.
Senator Grassley has been waiting patiently and was kind enough to let everybody else go. Senator Grassley.
SENATOR GRASSLEY: Well, thank you. And I welcome two of my former colleagues in the House of Representatives here to the Senate side and I'm glad to become more acquainted with others, although I have known Congressman Lewis for quite a while.
You know, I've never walked in the shoes of African- Americans, and there's -- and I don't think we've worked hard enough to understand the problems of race relations in America. We all try, but probably don't try hard enough.
So I'm not here to -- to -- to preach. I guess I'm here to try to tell you problems that I have as I measure the testimony of the Congressional Black Caucus and the testimony of other black Americans. I guess I have to measure the testimony of everybody. That's my responsibility.
I want to tell you that I appreciate your testimony. I suppose that if I were going to be really candid, I'd say that I'm troubled by the position of the -- of the -- what -- what I'd say is the elected leadership or the so-called leadership of the black community, national organizations as well as the Congressional Caucus, in opposing Judge Thomas, because we have also had several panels of witnesses who are black Americans -- let me say from the grassroots, as opposed to the elected leadership, and who know Clarence Thomas and have spoken eloquently about his commitment and devotion to ensuring equal opportunity.
Just yesterday, as an example, and you probably heard it as well as I did, we had this lady from Compton, California, with that -- speaking for herself, but also a member of the NAACP chapter there, Mrs. Hollyfield (ph), who laid down the challenge when she said that -- when she was speaking about the group you represent, the 26 members of the Congressional Black Caucus, she said, and I think maybe some of you -- a statement just made probably indicates to me that -- that you understand this -- but she said yesterday, "Twenty-six members of the Congressional Black Caucus don't represent 30 million black Americans anymore than 26 white congressmen could represent 200 million white Americans." That was her opinion.
And besides that, we have polls -- and I know we can't make decisions here in the Congress based upon public opinion polls, and maybe part of the problem with Congress is maybe too often we do, but we have polls showing a majority of black Americans support the confirmation of Judge Thomas to the Supreme Court, and only this week, the ABC News poll showed 58 percent of black Americans support Judge Thomas's confirmation.
I -- I also had an -- an article that I had collected for this hearing that quoted then-Lieutenant Governor Douglas Wild -- Wilder speaking out, espousing what I think are some of the same ideas as Judge Clarence Thomas might advocate, and I would read just a couple sentences from "The Washington Post" story of -- well, it's in '86, I guess in the fall of '86.
"In speech after speech, Wilder, who surprised many politicians with his November 5 election here, is telling black audiences something that they say white politicians can't suggest -- stop making excuses and take control of your destiny." And then going on to quote, "but Wilder, a 55-year-old Richmond lawyer who calls himself a conservative on many issues, is delivering his message with low-key rhetoric that warns blacks not to expect government to resolve many of their problems."
So, you know, I'm not here -- I -- I don't feel like I can ask you questions, just kind of give you some idea of some wrestling that goes on as I compare your opinions with those of other black Americans.
I guess I would just close by expressing my view that Judge Thomas shouldn't be condemned because he's a challenge to the status quo in his search for new answers for some old problems. And he probably was -- was able to do a better job of that as a policymaker than he's going to be able to do a job of that as a Supreme Court justice, but he will be in a powerful position and will be a -- a leader for these causes, even though it's interpreting law, rather than to help to make law.
Well, I appreciate you for listening to me, and I also appreciate your testimony.
REP. CONYERS: Senator Grassley, can I just point out to you that the NAACP had a discussion -- as a matter of fact, they met with Judge Thomas -- and there was one chapter that decided not to go along with the decision to urge that his nomination be rejected, and that was the chapter in Compton, California. That was out of, I think, 2,200 chapters across the country, and I think it really illustrates the exception, rather than the rule.
I might also just point out in my own district, I can tell you quite assuredly that there is no majority of people that support Clarence Thomas. What we have is a phenomenon I'd like to just explain that might make you rest a little bit more easily about what seems to be support for Judge Thomas.
When Judge Thmas was nominated to succeed Justice Thurgood Marshall, nationally, black America was overjoyed. I would warrant to you that 90-something percent of them had never heard of Clarence Thomas before, with all due respect to him. He was inside the Beltway -- a government bureaucrat.
But as we began to reveal the difficulty with his track record and the reasons that we opposed him, which spread not just from the Congressional Black Caucus, but through the church leadership, the civil rights community, the labor community, women's organizations, the understanding of him has completely changed those polling figures, and I -- I think that if you -- if you really understood that dynamic, that we were so happy to have a black named that that -- that drew immediate support, regardless of the fact that we knew him or not.
REP. STOKES: Senator, I would say, if I could just make an additional point here, the lady who spoke to you is absolutely right in the sense that we do not speak for all black Americans, nor do we presume that the 25 or 26 of us in the Congressional Black Caucus can speak for all Americans.
First, while we represent in our individual congressional districts, many of us, majority black constituents, we also represent white Americans. Some of us have congressional districts that are a majority white, as opposed to being majority black, and we don't presume that we can speak for all white Americans, either, by virtue of that in our districts.
What we do, I think, claim is this: We are not self-appointed or self-acclaimed leaders. Every two years, we do what you have to do in the Senate every six years, and that is go back to the people and get elected again. We go back every two years. We get elected and we represent individually 550,000 people. So, collectively there's 26 of us representing 550,000 people -- both black and white -- who go to the polls and vote for us.
And so to that degree we think we speak for those people to whom we go back every two years with a record. And they then vote upon us to return to the Congress based upon that record.
REP. OWENS: Listen, I don't want to be redundant. I just want to say pretty much the same thing. But there are a lot of people who trivialize and try to minimize the importance of elected officials. But, as one fellow elected official to another, you know what we go through to get elected. And you know that those of us who are in office during this process do represent the majority of people in our district. And some of us have been in public office for more than 20 years.
So, I think we speak not as self-appointed leaders, but we speak with great authority. And if you look across the country, elected officials not only in Congress but in state legislatures and in city legislatures, you'll find that the overwhelming majority of those elected officials feel the same way that we do about the appointment of Clarence Thomas.
REP. WASHINGTON: Senator, let me only add the point that I was attempting to make earlier and perhaps did not make clear enough. It isn't necessary to attack one person in order to state their point of view. So, I would ask you to look with a jaundiced eye upon those. Because we are elected, as are the members of the Senate. The people that you're talking to are either anointed or appointed but not elected. 25 of the 26 black Americans who have been elected by white, Hispanic, Asian, black, other people to the Congress of the United States, have stated opposition. That shouldn't subject us to attack. They shouldn't attack the body- politic because they disagree with the result.
SENATOR BIDEN: (Off mike) -- let me add, if I may, to my colleague's, which I found interesting, I thought insightful, and I think somewhat illuminating about what still amazes me after so many years of getting less than equal treatment in this country. Black Americans did what I suspect almost no one would do; upon the announcement of Mr. Thomas to be the nominee, not withstanding the fact that he was black, over 60 percent of black Americans had an open mind. Over 60 percent, from all the polls I read, said, "We're not sure, let's see what he has."
Now, I've not made my judgment on him yet, but I think that's astounding. Everyone likes to assume the point that you made, Congressman Washington, in such an articulate fashion, as you point out, is not true, that blacks all think alike. Here, a black man was appointed to the bench and almost 2/3 of black America said, not withstanding that, I'm going to withhold judgment until I find out more about him. I thought that was astounding and quite a compliment.
REP. LEWIS: Mr. Chairman, I think you make the point that as Americans, and as black Americans, I think as a people, we are very considerate. We're kind, we're compassionate. And we have a great deal of pride. And I think a lot of blacks supported Thomas when they heard that he had been nominated, because they were proud of the fact that a black was being nominated. And when they got more information they started looking and moving the other way.
And another point I want to make, the national Baptist convention came out against Clarence Thomas, representing more than 10 million Americans -- African-Americans. The black church is probably the most powerful, most influential group in the African- American community. And this is the largest black religious institution.
SENATOR BIDEN: Senator Specter.
SENATOR GRASSLEY: Okay. Can I make --
SENATOR BIDEN: Oh, I'm sorry. I beg your pardon.
SENATOR GRASSLEY: No, I --
SENATOR BIDEN: I though you were finished. I'm sorry.
SENATOR GRASSLEY: I'm finished, except that I want to make one statement to clarify that the poll I referred to of 58 percent black American support for Thomas was taken the 13th through the 15th -- so, after he had been testifying before us for four days. So, the black -- I mean, these people have had an opportunity to view his philosophy as well as just his name and who he is.
SENATOR BIDEN: Senator Specter.
SENATOR SPECTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I join my colleagues in welcoming you, our fellow members of Congress, to this hearing. The brief exchange between Senator Thurmond and this caucus, I think, was historical in a sense. And underlying sense it touched some very, very important feelings. The issue of affirmative action, I think, is a big one. And I've expressed before my regret that we didn't do more about it substantively. But that's what I would like to discuss with you gentlemen for a few minutes today.
And I believe that these hearings have had the benefit of having people focus on a substantive issue, not as much as I would have liked. But Judge Thomas has advocated a position in opposition to affirmative action on the grounds that, as to the minorities which it purports to help, that he feels that it is in fact harmful, because it fosters a notion that the minorities are disabled, fosters a notion that the minorities are in need of handouts, takes away self-respect. As to those who are in the majorities who are displaced, there is a sense of resentment, of unfairness, of being displaced by individuals with lesser qualifications. And he articulates a view that there is a significant increase in racial divisiveness.
Now, he has articulated these views in a context of an individual who has pulled himself up by his bootstraps, or perhaps not by his bootstraps -- because some say he had no boots -- by his kneecaps, or has become a very prominent individual. And perhaps more than any African-American since Justice Thurgood Marshall -- and there's the big concern about whether athletes are too much a role model in our society -- but he has thrust himself on the national scene in a way that no African-American has in modern times as a role model, and articulating a view of self-help, really sort of rugged self-help.
Now, the comment that I'd like to ask you to make is in response to two questions. One is, even if you don't agree with this articulation of opposition to affirmative action, doesn't it have a reasonable basis? And secondly, doesn't Judge Thomas have the potentiality to be a real vibrant role model for African-America youngsters who won't understand the nuances of the Griggs case or the Johnson case or Local 28, or don't know all the things that have happened in this hearing room, but simply see an African- American who has attained tremendous stature by pulling himself up with his own energies?
Congressman Conyers, may we start with you?
REP. CONYERS: Yes, I'm delighted to respond to your question, Senator Specter, because I'm sure at this stage of the hearing we must all know that he was a beneficiary of affirmative action as much as anyone has ever been in the country. And what I find ironic is that after Yale University law school, which used that procedure and was happy to bring him in and he succeeded well, that we find now that he doesn't think other people should use that same method. That seems to me to refer to the kind of character that I'm not really proud of. I didn't like the reference that he made, speaking of how much role model he's going to be, about his sister who worked very hard at a hospital and for one short period of time had to go on public assistance. And he held that up as the spectacle of why he didn't like welfare. I was absolutely shocked to hear that.
So, you won't hear me agreeing that he is a new role model second only to athletes, which you and I rightly agree, may be over- valued. I see him, as a matter of fact, doing exactly the wrong thing about the right strategy; when we talk about these legal systems of class-action and affirmative action and patterns of practice -- looking for result rather than intent -- these may be legal theories that may slip unnoticed in the general public, but I think that they stamp him as the wrong guardian of constitutionally derived remedies that we're struggling so hard to get into effect and on the books.
Two of you have worked with us and members of the Conference committee on the failed 1990 civil rights act, that was vetoed by a President who now threatens to veto yet another civil rights bill that we're toiling with. And these kinds of principles, to me -- when I think of Judge Thomas being elevated, I see more problem being created. I see us moving backward and not forward. And race won't help him there. A poverty-stricken background is of no use to us in what we think he's going to do based on what he did.
SENATOR SPECTER: Congressman Stokes.
REP. STOKES: Thank you, Senator Specter. The manner in which you have characterized the positions taken by Judge Thomas is what really frightens me about him. I think that, for one who has been the beneficiary of affirmative action, to say, "Now, I got mine. Now, you get yours the best way you can. It was okay for me, but you ought not have affirmative action." That frightens me.
Black Americans and other minorities who are in need of affirmative action aren't really asking for anything special. All they're asking for, Senator Specter, is, under our constitution, the guarantee of opportunity and equality that is given to all Americans under our constitution. That is not asking for a handout. When the person who is discriminated against in the marketplace or in the employmentplace asks just to have an equal opportunity, not preference, not priority, just an equal opportunity to earn a decent living, that's not a handout.
It is Judge Thomas's attitude towards people who need relief -- his attitude when he was head of the EEOC, of trying to get away from class-actions and reduce it down to individual action with the knowledge that what that did was to hurt the masses of cases. That is disturbing to me in the same way that Congressman Conyers had already mentioned; a man who had the attitude he had towards his own sister and her children -- the references that he made to them publicly before conservative black groups, while he made his points with the President and other conservatives, that this man can attack his own family -- and it turns out really that he wasn't telling the truth about his sister, while she was on welfare at that time, and he was referring to the children as learning how to cheat now and so forth, later information came that all of them really worked when they had an opportunity to do so.
But these are things that frighten me about him. I don't think, in the sense of a role model for black Americans, that a Judge Thomas will ever be the role model that a Thurgood Marshall is.
SENATOR SPECTER: Congressman Owens.
REP. OWENS: I think the thinking that you have set forth as being the position of Judge Thomas with respect to affirmative action and blacks not receiving any special treatment is a very backward kind of reasoning, very limited, lacking in compassion, and basically dishonest for any black in America to take that position. Because there's a -- (inaudible) -- reality, which black in America live through every day.
All Judge Thomas needs to do is take of his suit and his tie and walk through one day of life in this city or anywhere else in the country and he will experience some things which will let him know that blacks aren't treated in a very special way. Prejudice and discrimination is a part of reality of human-kind all over the globe.
(2:45 p.m.) We have all kinds of conflicts that people set up or reasons that they set up to discriminate against each other. Often, when both groups are white, it's religion or some other ethnic difference, but when you are dealing with blacks, you are dealing with people who are highly visible, and the degree to which discrimination is expressed against us is -- is far greater, and any black who says that we are just like everybody else and should never expect to have any kind of special treatment in order to overcome certain problems is basically dishonest.
They are dishonest because of the current reality, they are dishonest because, as an intellectual, they want to disregard all of history. Blacks are descendants of African slaves who were brought here against their will, not like other immigrants. We were for 300 years treated as slaves and suddenly set free with very little or nothing to compensate. There was a social experiment called the "Freedman's (ph) Bureau. Thank God for that because it created black -- historically black colleges. But basically, nothing happened when the slaves were set free to -- to deal with the problem that they had been -- had their labor stolen from them all those years, they had no property, et cetera, et cetera.
So the whole concept of reparations has to enter into dealing with the descendants of African slaves today. We refuse to accept that. In every group there is a certain percentage who will overcome and excel no matter what the conditions are. No matter how great the oppression, there is certain percentage who will overcome. The majority of the people are just normal human beings, they will not be able to overcome without some special help.
We accept the principle of reparation. In the cases of war, one nation loses a war, they have to pay. We also accepted it in the case of Israel and the Jews under the Nazis, we went one moral step further. An oppressed people who had not won the war were paid reparations by the Germans because of the conditions they subjected those people to during the course of the Nazi period. Some -- I am not asking for reparations and the payment of dollars to individual blacks -- but some consideration of what 300 years of slavery followed by years of de facto discrimination that impact on a people has to be taken into consideration. Any person, black or white, who is an intellectual and knows history, and wants to disregard this totally, I find, you know, either naive or basically dishonest, and I think in the case of Judge Thomas, it's basic dishonesty.
SENATOR SPECTER: My time is up. Mr. Chairman, may the answers continue?
SENATOR BIDEN: Yes.
REP. WASHINGTON: I will be brief in my response, not to say that the others weren't of course, because they are senior to me.
The first question you asked is about -- you ran off a litany of things dealing with -- and you arrived at the correct assessment -- that we are dealing with -- unfortunately -- with a period of more racial divisiveness in this country than any of us would think ordinarily possible in 1991, that we were on a course where things were getting better, now it appears that things are either standing still or moving backwards.
And the question you raised, as I understood it, Senator, had to do with Judge Thomas' views about affirmative action vis-a-vis that, and the question was does his position have a reasonable basis. The answer to that question is no, because it misappends (ph), if you will, the very touched-on of what discrimination is. Judge Thomas' view is that whatever has happened to him, good or bad, has happened to him as an individual.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. Prejudice is prejudgment because of group identification. People can't prejudge you if they don't know you except either you are too tall, Senator Simpson, or you are too short, or you are too black, or you are too this or you are too that based upon group identification. It oversimplifies and overlooks the fact that, as my colleague has said, the prejudice that is visited upon black people or hispanics, or any other groups of individuals, is born of someone having categorized them as being not as qualified to have the job.
So that's not going to go away. If you did away with all affirmative action, then there are white people and black people and hispanic people, and all kind of people, who think that the view of the sunset is somehow enhanced if they are standing on somebody else's shoulders. Nothing is going to change about that. There are always going to be white people who think the black guy got the job because he was black rather than because he was qualified.
We, as leaders, have to insure that regardless of how we feel about these laws, if these are laws on the books, that are bound to be enforced and overcome the vestiges of past discrimination, we can't play political cannon fodder with them, it seems to me. We lend ourselves to that kind of notion when we get out and play politics with notions about job discrimination and the like.
(2:50 p.m.)
We know that Griggs (ph) decided that there would be remedies available to overcome the built-in headwinds. As long as the headwinds continue to exist for women or for hispanics or for -- one of these days it's going to be for white males. A majority of the people in this country are not going to be while males forever. Demographers already tell us that. So when you become the minority, then will the built-in headwinds be opposing you, I think so.
In answer to the second part of the question of does he have the potential to be a role model, he has the same potential as -- as in Rudyard Kipling's admonition in the poem, "He travels the fastest who travels alone." When by the aid, which he has done, and the aid disowned, which he has done, he travels the fastest who travels alone. That is the role model he presents. He presents a role model that if you want to get ahead in life, don't come up through the ranks the same way that you and all the rest of us do. Get in the short line. That is exactly what he's done.
He went over, he looked at the line over here on this side, and he said that the line of black people who want to move up is shorter over there, so he got in the short line. And that's -- that's the role model that he presents for black Americans, I think.
REP. LEWIS: Senator, let me just say that in spite of all of the changes, in spite of all of the progress that we've made in this country during the past few years, the scars and stains of racism are still deeply embedded in American society. So there is still a need for affirmative action.
I think you have a nominee who would like to destroy the bridge of affirmative action that brought him across. It's forgetting those that have been left out and left behind. And on the question of role model, I think we want someone who is going to be a headlight rather than a taillight when it comes to the issue of simple justice and simple fairness.
Is this the type of role model that we want for our children, someone who is defiant, evasive, and inconsistent? It is not a role model I want for my son.
SENATOR SPECTER: Thank you very much, gentlemen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SENATOR BIDEN: Thank you.
Senator Simpson.
SENATOR SIMPSON: Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank my fellow legislators for coming. I appreciate that, and I do understand your terribly deep concern, and I am sure that the deliberations within your caucus were very spirited, because I know more than several members of your caucus, and quite well, and I enjoy my work with you as legislators. We have been on conference committees together and panels and forums, and that has been an opportunity for me to know you better. So I -- you know, I know that it was a spirited discussion you had in your caucus. We are going to have another group before us today, black lawyers, where the vote on Clarence Thomas was 113 to 104. That's reality in this one. The black community is split. For the first time in my memory here, on this panel, it is very real, and I understand that, and it's troubling to you, and things you talked about, the EEOC, and comments about the sister, and the affirmative action. All of those things were addressed by the nominee.
The sister sat right here with him for five days, an example of family affection, of the mother, the son. All those things have been covered, all parties have been treated fairly, no one is going to be shut out, but it seems to me that it's the diversity of thought and philosophy of this man that is the fear, the real fear. That is a terrible presumptuous statement of mine, because I don't -- I don't -- there is no way I can even identify, but I do think that it's unfortunate to see sometimes a white legislator telling a black person how a black person should feel. I don't like that one. But you don't like it either.
So this is not the usual black conservative. That is not who this Clarence Thomas is. That's why he's got to be a big puzzle to you and somewhat to us. But I don't think he's dishonest. I think he's fair, I think he's compassionate, and I think he's sensitive, and I think he's going to be a tremendous addition to the Supreme Court and he's going to surprise everybody.
And, Craig, I heard what you said about you and I have to buy our shirts in a separate place. We have a wing spread of about 37 1/2 inches, and we are different. But I enjoy you and admire you greatly. John Conyers and I have had some tough words back down the line, and I respect him. We've been on conferences. I don't know -- know Congressman Stokes somewhat, but (inaudible) Usafumi (ph) and Don Payne (ph), and you have got a lot of wonderful people in your group.
So here we go. We'll just try to do our best, and I really don't have any questions, but I can certainly understand the anguish and the -- you know, the heavy, heavy concern that you have.
I have no questions.
(2:55 p.m.)
SENATOR BIDEN: Thank you, Senator.
I am sure that one thing the five congressmen and I share in common is that if -- if Clarence Thomas is approved by the Senate and goes on the court, will be our sincere hope that he does SENATOR SIMPSON: You mean me?
SENATOR BIDEN: You, you personally. We hope when you are on the court, you and the President are having lunch someday and say, oh, my Lord, what have we wrought.
SENATOR SIMPSON: No, no, no. Now, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, you were gone from the chamber off and on for several minutes, and Orrin and I were going to take over this committee, so think how lucky you were. So I can assure you that he will surprise you.
SENATOR BIDEN: I am sure that day may come again when you all take over the committee. Hopefully, by that time I'll have no hair, but maybe not. It's going rapidly, I'm doing by best.
But at any rate, I want to thank you, and I'd say to -- I think it was Congressman Conyers -- I think you mentioned his sister. We'll enter in the record, but I think I am not mistaken when I say this -- I am not making a comment relative to Thomas himself, but relative to his sister, who did sit here the whole time, is a remarkable woman.
As I understand, this woman held down two minimum wage jobs and had an aunt who was taking care of her children while she could hold these two minimum wage jobs. The aunt became ill. Only when the aunt became ill did Clarence Thomas' sister -- again, I don't care what Clarence Thomas said, I am not talking about his comment, but just because her name has been mentioned a number of times -- as I understand, only when the aunt became ill and could not longer take care of her children during the day while she worked her two minimum wage jobs did she have to quit, get relief for period of time until she could rectify the situation, and then went back to work at a local hospital, and has worked since then. Quite a remarkable woman.
And, quite frankly, if what I read -- and I have no doubt, no reason to doubt it, I have heard nothing to controvert what I have just said -- I may have one of the details off, but that is the essence of it at a minimum. We will put in the record precisely what the situation is, but I kind of always thought that was the reason why we had public assistance, for people who had no choice. I don't know many Americans who like working at all, a lot of them work -- I mean that would work in that circumstance, two minimum wage jobs. And -- that's not true, there are tens of thousands who did it and like -- and have to do it.
But at any rate, not just because you have mentioned it, John, but her name has been mentioned off and on for -- off and on the last seven days, and I just think the record should note, a remarkable person facing a struggle that tens of thousands of Americans have faced in their lives, black and white.
REP. CONYERS: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of all of us here, we want to thank this committee for the unusual amount of time that has been afforded to us to exchange these views. We are very grateful for that.
SENATOR BIDEN: Simply stated, you are important. Simply stated, it is a simple fact of life. I thank you for all coming over. You have lent a great deal to this deliberation and given us all something to think about, and I am just delighted, in my very short years of practice before coming to the Senate at age 29, that I was not on the other side of a case in the courtroom with you, Congressman Washington. I now know why you were a successful trial lawyer.
REP. WASHINGTON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
SENATOR BIDEN: Having said that, let me thank you all again for being here, and we will continue to seek your counsel on many other things. And, John, look over the crime bill.
REP. WASHINGTON: May we be excused?
SENATOR BIDEN: You may be excused. Thank you.