[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 8, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3672-S3673]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    REMEMBERING SENATOR JACOB JAVITS

  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. Madam President, I would like to speak for just a 
moment in memory of Senator Jacob Javits, the distinguished New York 
Republican who served in this Chamber for 24 years. I think it does us 
all good to reflect on his career.
  I was honored to serve with Senator Javits for 2 years. In that time, 
I came to admire and respect him as a man who always scrupulously 
prepared for any legislation, who worked hard out of the spotlight, and 
who voted his conscience. And what a conscience it was.
  He did not have his name attached to very many bills--he was a 
Republican, after all, back when Republicans were not in the majority. 
Senator Javits served from 1958, just missing the years that the 
Republicans were in a majority at the time of President Eisenhower, to 
1980, just again missing the time the Republicans had a majority.
  But Jack Javits had his hand in more landmark legislation than most. 
The War Powers Act, the ERISA Act protecting private pensions, and the 
establishment of the National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities are 
often cited. But he also played important roles in civil rights and 
housing legislation, and late in his career, as the ranking member of 
the Foreign Relations Committee, he helped set the stage for the 
historic Middle East peace settlement.
  Nine years ago yesterday, Senator Javits died. His daughter, now the 
director of a housing program for disabled homeless, wrote a tribute to 
her father for yesterday's New York Newsday. She carries on his legacy 
well. I ask unanimous consent that her article be printed in the 
Record. It is a fitting homage to her father, a man of public service 
and conscience. We miss 
[[Page S3673]] his presence, but we remember his example.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                 [From New York Newsday, Mar. 7, 1995]

      About Republicans--My Father Was Cut From a Different Cloth

                           (By Carla Javits)

       Today is the ninth anniversary of my father's death. My 
     sense of loss has been acute at times, and now is one of 
     them. Jacob Javits served as a proud Republican in public 
     office, entering the U.S. Senate the year after I was born 
     and staying there until 1980. His achievements included 
     sponsoring the legislation that established the now 
     controversial National Endowments for the Arts and the 
     Humanities; the Employee Retirement Income Security Act 
     (ERISA), which for the first time established standards to 
     protect the private pensions of working people from 
     bankruptcy; and the War Powers Act, requiring the president 
     to consult with Congress before committing America to war. 
     But the legislative battle I remember most clearly was 
     passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. When my father returned 
     from the vote on that historic bill, he lifted me and threw 
     me up into the air.
       Throughout my life, I turned to my father to illuminate the 
     reasons for our country's political decisions. Despite our 
     differences of opinion, I could always rely for insight on 
     his balance, thoughtfulness and genuine love of debate. I 
     have recently felt his absence not only because of this March 
     anniversary, but also because I am so curious about what he'd 
     think of his party, which has taken control of Congress for 
     the first time since the 1950s. Because he is not here I've 
     been reading his books, and I find myself amazed by how 
     relevant they are to today's debate about the role of 
     government.
       In 1964, following the defeat of Barry Goldwater by Lyndon 
     Johnson in the presidential election, my father wrote ``Order 
     of Battle: A Republican's Call to Reason,'' an attempt to 
     redefine Republicanism. He maintained that the American 
     people had rejected Goldwater on the basis of his stance that 
     the federal government should shed its responsibility for 
     America's poor and working people, and had opted instead for 
     Johnson's War on Poverty. Personally, he withheld his support 
     from Goldwater ``as a matter of conscience. I could not 
     support a ticket which proposed to reverse the policies of 
     Arthur Vandenberg and Dwight D.
      Eisenhower in respect to foreign policy; the policies of 
     Abraham Lincoln and Dwight D. Eisenhower in civil rights 
     and the policies of Robert A. Taft in education and 
     housing.''
       Even though the 1994 elections have pushed the pendulum in 
     the opposite direction, my father's insights in 1964, still 
     strike me as stunningly on target: ``The main issue is this: 
     Under modern conditions how can we strike the right balance 
     between the need to decentralize the power of decision in 
     matters affecting our individual preferences, and the need 
     for a unity of direction in matters affecting all of us as 
     members of the American state and society?''
       While he was viewed as a liberal, I think my father saw 
     himself more as a patriot and proponent of free markets, with 
     a strong interest in how democracy could balance the just 
     claims of a diverse populace. He suggested that instead of 
     dividing ourselves into camps of liberalism and conservatism, 
     we focus on concrete proposals, testing them in light of 
     three questions: ``Will the specific terms of the proposal 
     enlarge the area of freedom and opportunity for the 
     individual while serving the common good? Given the aim of 
     the proposal, is it beyond the reach of private resources, 
     and therefore, must it be made a government matter? If a 
     government matter, is it beyond the reach of local and state 
     resources, and must it, therefore, be entrusted to the 
     central government?''
       My father's Republicanism found its roots in Alexander 
     Hamilton, Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt, and 
     combined a strong belief in free enterprise with firm 
     convictions about the role of federalism and government 
     activism. His politics were also informed by his personal 
     history--growing up poor on New York's Lower East Side. One 
     of his favorite stories was about a boxing match in which he 
     was knocked to the ground. The lesson he drew from it? Always 
     get back up swinging.
       Buried deep in his book I found several pages dedicated to 
     his activism in the development of housing programs. While he 
     favored programs that strongly encouraged private-sector, 
     federal and local cooperation, he stated, ``. . . to get done 
     what the people needed done by government was good, orthodox 
     Republicanism--if the private sector could not do it alone,'' 
     and that ``federal activity in housing should be expanded in 
     those directions where it has a proven record and should 
     strike out in new directions with imaginative programs that 
     show promise.''
       Those pages spoke directly to me. My father died before I 
     took my current job with an organization that helps non-
     profit, non-governmental agencies provide housing, combined 
     with health and social services, to homeless people with 
     disabilities. I can't help but think that my father who 
     worked so hard to eliminate poverty, would have been a leader 
     in efforts to end homelessness, which exploded in the years 
     after his death. I imagine that he might have especially 
     advocated the public/private partnership that drives the 
     successful development of supportive housing. It remains to 
     be seen whether his congressional successors will feel as he 
     did, that federal support of effective, cost-efficient and 
     humane housing for our most vulnerable citizens is ``good, 
     orthodox Republicanism.''
       One afternoon toward the end of my father's life, when he 
     was already ill, I was talking to him and crying over how 
     much I would miss him when he was gone. He said, a``You will 
     not miss me, you will remember me.'' On the second point he 
     was right.

  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. Madam President, I yield the floor and I suggest the 
absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  Mr. GRAMM. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Texas.

                          ____________________