[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 46 (Thursday, April 23, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E656-E658]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          HUMAN RIGHTS SPEECH

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, April 23, 1998

  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I submit for the Congressional Record the 
attached excerpt from a speech I gave to the Columbus Human Rights 
Commission on April 4, 1998.

    Address to the Human Rights Commission Annual Dinner, Columbus, 
                         Indiana, April 4, 1998

                          (By Lee H. Hamilton)

       I want to talk with you tonight about the challenges we 
     face in advancing human rights. A deep concern for human 
     rights is a basic and fundamental expression of the values of 
     the American people. It is part of who we are and what we 
     are.
       In one sense, the history of this country can be told as 
     the story of the advancement of human rights. Our ancestors 
     fought a War of Independence to secure civil and political 
     liberties, and a Civil War to ensure that all of its people, 
     black and white, should be free and enjoy the basic rights of 
     citizenship. In this century, Americans have struggled to 
     secure political, social, and economic rights for women, 
     minorities, and working people.
       American has also been a model, a guide to other countries 
     in its concern for human rights. With some success, and with 
     some failures, too, we have sought to promote democratic 
     institutions and the observance of human rights at home and 
     abroad.
       How would you respond if I asked you to define for me in 
     one sentence what this country is all about? Most of you--I 
     think-- would say: At its very core, this country is about 
     giving its people the opportunity to be the best that they 
     can be. Our country does not provide equal opportunity to all 
     its citizens. It does not assure success. But, at the very 
     least, it does provide opportunity and it tries to remove 
     barriers that deny us a fair chance to succeed. Human rights 
     are about removing those obstacles, and ensuring that all of 
     us are treated fairly, equally, and justly in our individual 
     pursuit of happiness.
       The Columbus Human Rights Commission is so important 
     because it does precisely that. In fighting discrimination 
     and human rights abuses at the local level, this Commission 
     works to ensure that the magnificent ideal of the Declaration 
     of Independence--that all men are created equal--becomes 
     reality. It serves to help this community be a place where 
     everyone has an opportunity to become the best they can be.


      i. civil rights at home: changing attitudes, changing issues

       Our country is today in the midst of a national debate 
     about civil rights and race relations, perhaps for the first 
     time since Congress passed landmark civil and voting rights 
     laws in the mid-1960s. I have cast over 5,000 votes in my 
     years in Congress, but few, if any, have given me more 
     satisfaction than to support these laws. Much of the current 
     debate has focused on affirmative action (more on that 
     later). The debate, however, also goes to more fundamental 
     questions about race in America: do we continue to be two 
     Americas, one black and one white? and if we do live in two 
     Americas, is that acceptable? and if it is acceptable, what 
     does that say about the future of this country?
       Someone asked me the other day how public views on race 
     relations have changed since the Civil Rights Era. Three 
     things come to mind.
     a. Public consensus
       First, there was broad public consensus in the 1960s on 
     what was wrong in our country and what needed to be done. 
     Americans were outraged by the treatment of Civil Rights 
     marchers in the South, and demanded that Congress take steps 
     to secure basic civil and political liberties for all 
     Americans in every part of the country. Today, we have strong 
     anti-discrimination laws on the books, and an overwhelming 
     majority of Americans agree that racial discrimination is 
     wrong and must be proscribed.
       Consensus quickly breaks down, however, once you scratch 
     beneath the surface. Blacks and whites, for example, may 
     agree that racial discrimination is wrong, but they have 
     sharply differing views about how prevalent such 
     discrimination is today in our society. In a recent poll 
     three in four white Americans said blacks in their community 
     are treated the same as whites. Only 49% of the blacks 
     agreed. Whites really see very little problem when it comes 
     to opportunities for blacks in jobs, education, and housing. 
     Many blacks see racial discrimination as a fact of life.
       Whites have generally become more optimistic that progress 
     toward equality has occurred and that racial discrimination 
     has declined. Blacks, in contrast, are increasingly 
     discouraged about race relations and discrimination.
       The debate over affirmative action provides another example 
     of the breakdown in the consensus. Supporters of affirmative 
     action say that while the situation has improved, racism 
     persists in this country, and that affirmative action is 
     needed to remedy the effects of discrimination. Affirmative 
     action programs, they will note, have provided opportunities 
     for millions of minorities, expanding the American middle 
     class and strengthening our political system and economy. 
     Opponents respond that affirmative action is fundamentally 
     unfair, that people should succeed or fail based on 
     character, talent and effort, not race. Either they say that 
     we now live in a colorblind society so race-based policies 
     are unnecessary, or they say that, while racism may 
     persist, affirmative action leads to double standards 
     which heighten rather than reduce racial tensions.
     b. sense of optimism
       Second, during the Civil Rights Era there was a strong 
     sense of public optimism about tackling problems associated 
     with race. I don't suggest it was a Golden Age. We then lived 
     in a segregated society, where minorities were denied 
     political and civil rights as well as economic and 
     educational opportunities.
       What has changed, however, is our outlook on the future of 
     race relations. Back then, many of us took to heart Dr. 
     King's vision of an integrated America, where people would be 
     judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of 
     their character. We, blacks and whites, believed that anti-
     poverty efforts could wipe out the inner city slums and lift 
     the poor into the great American middle class. We believed--
     perhaps naively--that anti-discrimination laws would lead to 
     a society with fully integrated schools, neighborhoods and 
     workplaces.
       We have made remarkable progress toward racial equality 
     over the last 30 years, seen, I suppose, most conspicuously 
     in the expansion of voting rights and of a black middle 
     class, educated and affluent, that has taken advantage of new 
     opportunities. But, in many other respects, this is not the 
     world we dreamed of 30 years ago. White and black America 
     are, in many respects, drifting apart. Many blacks feel 
     aggrieved. They observe that black incomes are still only 75% 
     of white ones; 40% of black children live in poverty; black 
     unemployment is more than twice as high; and the life 
     expectancy for black males is more than eight years less than 
     for white men (65 years vs. 73 years). They say whites have 
     lost interest in their plight, cutting federal programs that 
     benefit their communities and eliminating affirmative action 
     programs that have created educational and job opportunities. 
     The response of a growing number of blacks is not a call for 
     more integration with white America, but separation and self-
     help.
     c. demographic changes
       Third, the debate on race in the 1960s was straightforward. 
     It dealt almost exclusively

[[Page E657]]

     with relations between whites and blacks. The civil and 
     voting rights laws and affirmative action were a response to 
     the terrible legacy of racial discrimination, particularly 
     towards blacks, in this country.
       Our civil rights agenda has changed over the years, first 
     in response to the demand for women's rights and, more 
     recently, in response to the changing demographics of the 
     country. More women are in the workplace than ever before, 
     and the nation has become more diverse, ethnically and 
     racially, in the last 30 years as immigration from Asia and 
     Latin America has swelled. According to the most recent 
     Census estimates, our population is roughly 25% non-white; 
     that figure is projected to reach 50% by the middle of the 
     next century, easily within the lifetime of my grandchildren. 
     As early as next year, whites will no longer be the majority 
     in California.
       The range of new civil rights challenges is astonishingly 
     broad. Among them:
       Discrimination and harassment claims have increased as more 
     women enter the workforce. Whole new rules are being worked 
     out in the era of increased gender equality.
       Our school systems are educating a more diverse student 
     population, many of whom will enter school lacking basic 
     English language and learning skills.
       Many states and local communities are challenged to absorb 
     immigrant groups into their economies and address their 
     social and cultural needs.
       Minority populations are becoming more active in the 
     political process, seeking greater representation within all 
     levels of government and within political party structures.


                        II. WHERE ARE WE TODAY?

       Where are we today in civil rights in this country?
       On the positive side: We have made progress in enacting 
     laws to promote equality--in voting rights, public 
     accommodation access, and non-discrimination. A genuine 
     positive change has taken place in the attitude of most 
     Americans toward racial issues. More of us understand that we 
     should accept equality among the races as a matter of 
     principle. Finally, the black middle class has grown, black 
     business has expanded, and the number of black public 
     officials has increased.
       And yet there are many problems. We understand now that 
     racial issues cannot be solved by laws alone. Inequalities, 
     rooted in feelings of prejudice and distrust, permeate our 
     culture and society. I also find a lack of urgency about 
     racial issues. For example, I rarely hear from constituents 
     about race at my public meetings today. Many feel that the 
     major wrongs have been righted, and they have other things on 
     their minds: balancing the budget, improving schools, 
     creating good jobs, fighting crime.
       Hence, while we have worked hard to tear down racial 
     barriers and promote equality, we all know--as Jim Henderson 
     reminded us last year before this gathering--that our work is 
     not done--in Columbus or in the country. Much has been done, 
     much is still to do.


                     III. WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

       The question, then, is where do we go from here on civil 
     rights? How do we build on our successes of the last 
     generation? How do we make for a more inclusive, more just 
     society which affords every American the opportunity to be 
     the best he or she can be?
     a. affirmative action
       I am one who continue to believe there is an appropriate 
     role for affirmative action, properly defined. Affirmative 
     action programs are being challenged successfully in courts 
     and legislatures across the country. The U.S. Supreme Court 
     has worked to limit the use of race-based preferences in the 
     workplace, on contracts, in legislative redistricting, at all 
     levels of government. The federal government is in the 
     process of retooling its affirmative action programs in 
     response to these Court decisions. The overall effect of 
     these changes will likely be to curtail government contracts 
     flowing to minority and women-owned businesses.
       I am also concerned by efforts to bar affirmative action in 
     college and graduate school admissions. One federal appeals 
     court has said that the University of Texas cannot use race 
     as a factor in law school admissions. California voters 
     approved a state referendum to similar effect at state 
     college and graduate programs. As a consequence, minority 
     enrollment for incoming classes at these schools plummeted 
     last year. The long-term effects on enrollment remain to be 
     seen.
       The goal of public policy should be to make sure that all 
     of us have the opportunity to develop our talents to the 
     fullest. The rapid rollback of affirmative action programs 
     will, I think, disserve that goal. While I oppose quotas or 
     rigid preferences, I see affirmative action plans as a tool 
     to create a more inclusive work place and open up 
     opportunities for all persons. Real equality of opportunity 
     is the key to minority advancement. Where discrimination has 
     existed, it is fair to provide an equal opportunity to catch 
     up. Affirmative action can promote equal consideration, and 
     not reverse discrimination.
       My view is that compensating for past discrimination is 
     acceptable if done by using special training programs, talent 
     searches and targeted financial help, and by helping 
     disadvantaged groups compete. I do not, however, want to 
     predetermine the results of competition with a system of 
     quotas. Government can act to promote racial integration, 
     help disadvantaged persons improve their circumstances, and 
     proscribe intentional racial discrimination, but it cannot 
     assure outcomes in hiring, contracting, and admission for 
     higher education.
     b. integration vs. separation
       Affirmative action and other government-led efforts may 
     provide opportunities to blacks and other minorities, but 
     they will not bridge the divide between the races. Blacks and 
     whites may work in the same place, but they often live in 
     separate neighborhoods, go to separate schools, socialize in 
     different circles. Some of this separation can be traced to 
     discrimination, but increasingly, I think, it is by choice.
       I recently read a comment of a black woman, a professional 
     who works with whites, but lives in a predominantly black 
     community. She said: ``It's hard to grow up in white 
     neighborhoods. There are always doubts about you, about your 
     intelligence. This is what America is supposed to be about, 
     total integration, but the reality is that most of us keep to 
     our own in this country, and not because there is 
     specifically some race factor, but because we feel more 
     comfortable that way.''
       Some will say there is nothing wrong with people of a 
     particular race choosing to live and socialize with their 
     own. That if this country stands for anything it is 
     individual liberty, and if someone chooses to live in an all-
     black community or an all-Hispanic community or an all-Korean 
     community, that is their choice and who are we to criticize 
     it.
       Others worry that separation of the races will lead to the 
     balkanization of America. That we have built our nation on a 
     shared set of values, beliefs and traditions. And that 
     separation tears at the very fabric of our society and 
     institutions.
       We can argue all day about the causes of this separation--
     the lack of economic opportunities; racism; the burden of 
     history--but the question Americans must answer is whether 
     this trend toward separation is desirable. I think it is not.
       I am an integrationist at heart. I believe in the motto of 
     this country: E Pluribus Unum, out of many, one. We can't 
     compel people to move to integrated neighborhoods. We can't 
     force them to socialize with people of other races. 
     Integration should, nonetheless, be our goal. We don't have 
     to reach that goal today, but we should strive to take steps 
     day-by-day to get there. We are, after all, one nation, one 
     family, indivisible.
     c. individual and community-based action
       My own experience is that the best way to improve relations 
     among races is to have people work together at something they 
     both believe to be worthwhile and important. If you get two 
     adult women, for example, of different races together to talk 
     about the future of their children, you can see the making of 
     harmony and consensus. People who may not believe they have 
     very much in common learn that they really do. A dialogue 
     that simply leaves people feeling that we remain far apart 
     doesn't get us very far.
       We must talk frankly, listen carefully, and work together 
     across racial lines. We must all take responsibility for 
     ourselves, our conduct, our attitude--and our community. We 
     must talk less about separation and bitterness, and more 
     about unity, reconciliation and shared values. We must do 
     everything to assure that every person in our community has 
     real opportunity. Give every child in the community, every 
     adult, too, the opportunity to get a good, decent, safe, 
     fulfilling education to get ahead in life.
       On a personal level, I urge you to get to know well a 
     person of another race, and try to see the world through 
     their eyes. Reach out to persons of a different race. Speak 
     to them; listen to them, as I know many in this audience do. 
     When people do this, they find a lot more in common than they 
     thought.
       I also urge you to learn more about the remarkable civil 
     rights history of our nation. Two recent books, ``Pillar of 
     Fire'' by Taylor Branch and ``The Children'' by David 
     Halberstam, give us stirring accounts of this era. One of the 
     most memorable experiences of my congressional career was 
     getting to know Martin Luther King, Jr. at Washington 
     National Airport as he was emerging on the national scene. 
     Both us were waiting for delayed planes, and for an hour or 
     so I visited with him. I caught from Dr. King--as I have from 
     my colleagues in Congress, John Lewis and Andy Young, two 
     other civil rights heroes--a glimpse of their courage and 
     vision.
       Thirty years after Dr. King's death, we can say that we 
     have torn down many of the legal barriers in the country, but 
     we have not been as successful breaking down the barriers in 
     our hearts and minds. No one should cling to the illusion 
     that the battle for equal opportunity and equal justice has 
     been won.
       Tolstoy said that many people want to change the world, but 
     only a few want to change themselves. He had the right 
     perspective as we think about race. You and I have to engage 
     each other, learn from each other, endure the pain of 
     reflection and candor, and move on to higher ground. Progress 
     in race relations is not simply a matter of economic 
     statistics or survey data, but it is measured to a large 
     extent through interaction of people, with acts of 
     brotherhood, tolerance, and understanding.
       The work of the Columbus Human Rights Commission is 
     instrumental to this process of discussion, healing and 
     growth. The Commission provides a forum for people of diverse 
     backgrounds and races to air their

[[Page E658]]

     comments and concerns, to debate the issues in a frank 
     manner, and to find solutions which will make our community 
     more inclusive and more just.


                             IV. CONCLUSION

       Our success in meeting these challenges will depend--in 
     large measure--on our commitment to human rights. This 
     evening has been a success if it causes each one of us to 
     renew our commitment to human rights and to act in specific 
     ways on that commitment.
       The stakes are high. This country has been dedicated to the 
     cause of human rights from its inception. If you and I do not 
     lead in human rights, who will? Surely those of us who have 
     been given so much--good parents, good education, good 
     health, a marvelous country--and all of our many blessings--
     must take the lead for human rights into the 21st Century.
       So when you leave here in a few minutes, what are you going 
     to do? May I suggest you and I renew a simple pledge: We 
     stand for justice. We combat injustice wherever we may find 
     it--at home or abroad, in our own community or across the 
     world. Leaders and legislation may be important, but what 
     happens in your life, in your home, in your heart is more 
     important than what happens in the White House.
       We join hands in support of the Human Rights Commission in 
     Columbus in a noble cause: contributing to the direction and 
     success of a free society and a humane world.

     

                          ____________________