[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 67 (Thursday, May 13, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5391-S5393]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page S5391]]
          50TH ANNIVERSARY OF BROWN VERSUS BOARD OF EDUCATION

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Madam President, it gives me great pleasure to join 
with my colleagues today and talk about something that happened 50 
years ago, which has been a difficult and important journey that we 
have been on. On May 17, 1954, Dwight Eisenhower was President of the 
United States and the Supreme Court of the United States issued an 
opinion that changed the country. It was Brown v. the Board of 
Education. The Brown was the Reverend Oliver Brown of Topeka, KS, my 
hometown.
  The case of Brown v. the Board of Education was the case that ended 
segregation in our schools and in our society. It was really the 
beginning legal case that moved that forward.
  On Monday, we will dedicate in Topeka, KS, the school that was the 
basis for the complaint. It is the Monroe School. It will be dedicated 
as a national historical site, a national park. The President will be 
there. A number of different dignitaries will be there to celebrate and 
say where we have been over the last 50 years after we ended 
segregation in this country in 1954 and where we are going.
  It is going to be a beautiful occasion. It is a momentous occasion. 
It is an important occasion. We have been on a journey during that 
period of time of the 50 years. It has been a rocky road since that 
time period. It was certainly difficult before that time period. It has 
not always been going in the right direction, but at the end of the day 
we have been going in the overall right direction.
  We are on a journey. What is the destination? Well, I think the best 
place to look is to Martin Luther King's words. He said:

       The end is reconciliation; the end is redemption; the end 
     is the creation of the beloved community.

  These are words of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King spoken on 
December 3, 1956, after the completion of the Montgomery bus boycott. 
These words symbolize the goal of this great Nation, a goal that is 
echoed throughout our history: The end is reconciliation; the end is 
redemption; the end is the creation of the beloved community.
  In this quote, Dr. King, who was and remains a prophet to the Nation, 
is speaking of a time in which all people in the United States will be 
able to live together harmoniously, reconciled with one another and 
with God, as one people under God.
  Today we look back on the history of our Nation and take note of how 
far we have come as a people. We are reminded that we owe a great debt 
to those who have fought valiantly for the freedoms we easily take for 
granted.
  On the eve of the 50th anniversary of this case, it is fitting that 
today the Senate takes time to honor the Brown case, the Brown family, 
which is one of the greatest civil rights cases in our Nation's history 
and one that changed the way in which we view equality under the law in 
our society. More than any other case, Brown sets this Nation on a path 
of ensuring freedom and equality in America.
  The United States is a nation that symbolizes the essence of freedom, 
equality, and democracy. These principles are embedded in the documents 
that established this country. Yet as a young nation, America had not 
yet bestowed these ideals upon African Americans who resided in this 
country. Though progress was made after the Civil War, America had yet 
to realize her true potential as a nation built on freedom and equality 
for all. It was not until the landmark Supreme Court decision of Brown 
was rendered that our country was ushered into a symbol of freedom and 
democracy of what Dr. King did so eloquently describe as the beloved 
community.

  May 17, 2004, marks the 50th anniversary of the Brown decision which 
effectively ended school segregation in America. However, the history 
of desegregation of our public school system started before Brown in 
such cases as Murray v. Maryland and Sweatt v. Painter. It was the 
Brown case that caught fire and changed the course of American history 
in the way in which we view equality in the eyes of the law.
  Before Brown, many States in this country held and enforced racially 
segregated laws which was an atrocious practice. Many individuals cited 
the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson case, and I note that while the Court got 
it right in Brown, the Court has gotten it wrong in the last two. 
Courts are not infallible institutions. They are made of people such as 
we are. They make good decisions and they make bad situations. They 
made a bad decision in Plessy that was the law of the land for 50 years 
after it--a little more than 50 years. They made a bad decision in the 
Dred Scott decision--the Fugitive Slave Act that was applicable across 
the land until, really, the Civil War. They make good decisions and 
they make bad decisions.
  The Plessy case, which was a bad decision, sanctioned the separate 
but equal doctrine as the grounds for keeping school segregation legal.
  During that time, there were court cases that challenged this 
separate but equal doctrine because the schools for African American 
children were substandard facilities with out-of-date textbooks and 
often no basic school supplies. In fact, in Kansas, alone, there were 
11 school integration cases dating from 1881 to 1949, prior to Brown.
  By 1950, African-American parents began to renew their efforts to 
challenge State laws that only permitted their children to attend 
certain schools, and as a result, they organized through the National 
Association for the Advancement of Colored People the NAACP, an 
organization founded in 1909 to address the issue of the unequal and 
discriminatory treatment experienced by African Americans throughout 
the country.
  It was at this time that Rev. Oliver L. Brown, a citizen of Topeka, 
Kansas became part of the NAACP strategy to file suit against various 
school boards on behalf of African American parents and their children. 
This effort was led first by Charles Houston and later by Thurgood 
Marshall.
  On February 28, 1951, Rev. Brown, along with 13 parents and 20 
children, filed a lawsuit against the Topeka School Board on behalf of 
his 7-year-old daughter, Linda.
  Like other young African Americans, Linda had to cross a set of 
railroad tracks and board a bus that took her to the ``colored'' school 
on the opposite side of the city from where she lived--even though a 
school for white children was located only a few blocks from her home.
  The case was taken to the District Court of Kansas, but the ruling 
was not beneficial to Rev. Brown and the others. The court admitted 
that segregated schools gave African American children a feeling of 
inferiority, but felt that they must uphold the decisions of Plessy vs. 
Ferguson, which stated that separate but equal is still equal, and 
subsequently, ruled in favor of the Board of Education.
  On October 1, 1951, Rev. Brown's team appealed the case to the 
Supreme Court, where the Brown case was combined with other NAACP cases 
from Delaware, South Carolina, Virginia, and Washington, DC, which was 
later, heard separately. These combined cases became known as Oliver L. 
Brown et al. v. the Board of Education of Topeka, et al.
  There were many notable African Americans who helped to bring these 
cases to the United States Supreme Court; however, none so famous as 
Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, who valiantly defended the 
rights of not only Linda Brown and the other defendants in the case, 
but of an entire race of individuals who were treated as second class 
citizens.
  During the course of the trial, Thurgood Marshall used expert 
witnesses in child psychology and referenced the detrimental impact 
that segregation in our Nation's School System had on African American 
children.
  He also referenced the cases of Sweatt v. Painter, and McLaurin v. 
Oklahoma, both of which made a lot of progress in the desegregation of 
colleges and universities when the court ruled that the restrictions of 
African Americans actually hinder their learning.
  He argued that younger children were equally hindered by segregation, 
and therefore there was no logical argument that could justify ruling 
against segregation in higher learning, and uphold the Plessy v. 
Ferguson case when referring to elementary and secondary schools.
  On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court rendered its decision to rule 
racial segregation in schools unconstitutional.

[[Page S5392]]

Further, the Supreme Court found the ``separate but equal'' doctrine to 
be in violation of the 14th amendment of the United States 
Constitution, which states, among other things, that:

       No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge 
     the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United 
     States.

  When the court ruled, in 1954, that school segregation laws were 
unconstitutional, the Supreme Court demolished the legal foundation on 
which racial segregation stood. The court's opinion, written and 
delivered by Chief Justice Earl Warren, also served as a stirring moral 
indictment of racial segregation, and an eloquent challenge to America 
to cast off its prejudices and extend its promises of life, liberty, 
and the pursuit of happiness to all citizens, regardless of race or 
color.
  Today, I am proud to join with my colleagues in the U.S. Senate to 
honor this magnificent case in our Nation's history.
  I am encouraged that with this case, this Nation was able to move one 
step closer to that ``beloved community'' Dr. King referenced, where 
redemption through reconciliation can occur. Therefore, the importance 
of this case does not solely reside in the law, but equally sheds light 
on our responsibility to humanity and upon our ability to reconcile our 
differences, with one another and through that process seek redemption, 
and achieve the creation of the ``beloved community.''
  As we celebrate Brown today and next week, we are one step closer to 
that goal for our country and I invite our Nation to join with us in 
celebrating this magnificent case that stirred a Nation's consciousness 
and was the basis for shattering segregation in our society.
  I yield the floor.
  Celebrating a Landmark Decision in the Civil Rights Movement: the 
50th Anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education Decision
  Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, from Civil War to the war against racism, 
Kansas has been a battleground in the fight for equality. Oliver Brown 
was a soldier in this struggle, as he courageously fought to prove that 
separate among the people of this great Nation is not equal.
  The watershed case that bears his name stands for all time as an 
important victory in the civil rights movement. On Monday, May 17, 
2004, we will celebrate the 50th anniversary of this momentous 
decision. And in Topeka, KS, we will gather to dedicate Monroe 
Elementary School as the Brown v. Topeka Board of Education National 
Historic site. This new addition to the National Park Service will 
afford us the proper setting to fully reflect on what this decision has 
meant to our Nation, and will provide future visitors with a more 
complete understanding of how Linda Brown's struggle changed the course 
of our Nation's history.
  The Monroe Elementary School, purchased in 1877 by the Topeka Board 
of Education, was one of the four segregated elementary schools for 
African American children in Topeka. The current building is actually 
the third Monroe school to stand there, built in 1926.
  Monroe was a good school, built by the same architect who built other 
schools in Topeka, including those reserved for white children. And the 
teachers were well-trained, many of whom had advanced degrees. This 
wasn't a case of substandard facilities, or a lack of educational 
opportunities for Linda Brown and her classmates. This was simply 
injustice under the law, and the need to right a grievous wrong.
  The Brown Foundation, under the leadership of Cheryl Brown Henderson, 
has worked diligently to preserve the bricks and mortar that were a 
part of this historic case. Far more than just a building, however, 
this site represents the genesis of the movement to strike down our 
Nation's segregationist policy.
  Thanks to his daughter Cheryl's efforts, and those of countless 
others, Monroe Elementary was designated a National Historic Landmark 
in 1991. I, along with Senator Robert J. Dole and Senator Nancy Landon 
Kassebaum, am proud to have supported legislation creating the Brown v. 
Board of Education National Historic site, which was signed into law by 
President George Bush in 1992.
  As stated in the legislation, the purposes of this important site 
are:

       To preserve, protect, and interpret the places that 
     contributed materially to the landmark U.S. Supreme Court 
     decision which ended segregation in public education, to 
     interpret the role of the Brown case in the civil rights 
     movement, and to assist in the preservation and 
     interpretation of related resources within the city of Topeka 
     that further the understanding of the civil rights movement.

  That bill challenged us to properly commemorate and interpret this 
history, and ensure that the story of Linda Brown and the thousands of 
other children who were denied access to white elementary schools is 
told. This new site has met every expectation of ours, and pays proper 
tribute to the struggle for civil rights. As we dedicate the Brown v. 
Board of Education National Historic site, what was once a building 
designed to educate a few, now stands ready to educate us all.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.


                                  Iraq

  Mr. BOND. Madam President, I came to speak on other matters, but I 
thought it would be helpful to straighten out some things, where maybe 
those who are watching or who have heard might have a misapprehension 
as to the position that the Secretary of Defense has taken.
  The Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff are in Baghdad today. I have heard it said that the Secretary 
defended the rules of engagement for the Abu Ghraib prison, with 
possibly a misunderstanding that he approved or somehow condoned what 
went on and what has been revealed in the shocking photos of abuse we 
have seen.
  Let's be clear on one thing. The rules of engagement are very clear, 
and the rules of engagement do not permit or tolerate the kind of 
abuses we have seen depicted in the Abu Ghraib prison. This is a real 
difference between a free, democratic country with respect for human 
rights observing the Geneva Convention, and those who do not. It has 
been stated on the Senate floor that we are no better than the Saddam 
Hussein government that was running the prisons. That is an unnecessary 
slanderous attack on the men and women of the military who do believe, 
by and large--99.999 percent--in the standards we set.
  The difference in our country is that when we see these evidences of 
abuse we move to do something about them. Investigations began in 
January. The first criminal indictments were handed down near the end 
of March. We are proceeding with the prosecution of those who have been 
shown to be engaged, and we will follow that up the chain of command if 
somebody gave orders that were interpreted to permit this kind of 
behavior. This is a real difference--and I think it is important for 
Americans and people throughout the world to realize that there is a 
difference.
  It was said earlier this morning that the President took a U-turn 
away from dealing with terrorism and went into Iraq. Let me remind my 
colleagues and the people of the United States that, after viewing the 
intelligence, 77 Senators said we need to do something about Iraq 
because it is a dangerous country, harboring terrorists. We didn't take 
a U-turn. We went into Iraq because it was one of the great dangers to 
the world, in terms of harboring terrorists.
  David Kay, who was leading the Iraqi Survey Group, made many 
inspections over there. He didn't find large caches of weapons of mass 
destruction. Nobody said we would. What he did say when he came back 
was the situation in Iraq was far more dangerous than we even knew 
because terrorist gangs were roaming Iraq. Iraq had produced and used 
chemical or biological weapons on its own people and on the Iranians, 
and this was a dangerous territory. We have seen in recent days how 
dangerous it has become because of al-Zarqawi, a colleague-in-arms of 
Osama bin Laden, set up 2 to 3 years ago, and Ansar al-Islam, which is 
the deadly, vicious terrorist organization that beheaded Nicholas Berg.
  If the world needs to know the difference, the difference is when 
there are abuses such as putting a chain around the neck of an Iraqi 
prisoner, we are going to prosecute people. In Iraq, al-Zarqawi can cut 
the head off an innocent American hostage and I have

[[Page S5393]]

yet to hear any outcry or outrage from the people in that region. There 
is a real difference.
  But we ought to be worried about young people hearing about 
hostages--innocent hostages--being beheaded. Daniel Pearl of the Wall 
Street Journal was beheaded.
  These are the people we are dealing with. This is why this matter is 
important. This battle is not won. It is going to be a battle not of 
months, maybe not even of years, and maybe decades. But the world is 
going to be safer, and we are going to be safer in the United States if 
we can continue the battle President Bush has laid out to carry the war 
on terrorism to those countries that harbor terrorists.

                          ____________________