[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 15]
[Senate]
[Pages 19847-19850]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS

                                 ______
                                 

SENATE RESOLUTION 441--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT OCTOBER 
  17, 1984, THE DATE OF THE RESTORATION BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF 
 FEDERAL RECOGNITION TO THE CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF COOS, LOWER UMPQUA, 
              AND SIUSLAW INDIANS, SHOULD BE MEMORIALIZED

  Mr. SMITH (for himself and Mr. Wyden) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs:

                              S. Res. 441

       Whereas the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Restoration Act 
     (25 U.S.C. 714 et seq.), which was signed by the President on 
     October 17, 1984, restored Federal recognition to the 
     Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw 
     Indians;
       Whereas the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and 
     Siuslaw Indians historically inhabited land now in the State 
     of Oregon, from Fivemile Point in the south to Tenmile Creek 
     in the north, west to the Pacific Ocean, then east to the 
     crest of the Coast Range, encompassing the watersheds of the 
     Coos River, the Umpqua River to Weatherly Creek, the Siuslaw 
     River, the coastal tributaries between Tenmile Creek and 
     Fivemile Point, and portions of the Coquille watershed;
       Whereas in addition to restoring Federal recognition, that 
     Act and other Federal Indian statutes have provided the means 
     for the Confederated Tribes to achieve the goals of cultural 
     restoration, economic self-sufficiency, and the attainment of 
     a standard of living equivalent to that enjoyed by other 
     citizens of the United States;
       Whereas by enacting the Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw 
     Restoration Act (25 U.S.C. 714 et seq.), the Federal 
     Government--
       (1) declared that the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower 
     Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians were eligible for all Federal 
     services and benefits provided to federally recognized 
     tribes;
       (2) provided the means to establish a tribal reservation; 
     and
       (3) granted the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, 
     and Siuslaw Indians self-government for the betterment of 
     tribal members, including the ability to set tribal rolls;
       Whereas the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and 
     Siuslaw Indians have embraced Federal recognition and self-
     sufficiency statutes and are actively working to better the 
     lives of tribal members; and
       Whereas economic self-sufficiency, which was the goal of 
     restoring Federal recognition for the Confederated Tribes of 
     Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians, is being realized 
     through many projects: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that October 
     17, 1984, should be memorialized as the date on which the 
     Federal Government restored Federal recognition to the 
     Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw 
     Indians.
                                 ______
                                 

SENATE RESOLUTION 442--APOLOGIZING TO THE VICTIMS OF LYNCHING AND THEIR 
DESCENDANTS FOR THE SENATE'S FAILURE TO ENACT ANTI-LYNCHING LEGISLATION

  Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself and Mr. Allen) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:

                              S. Res. 442

       Whereas the crime of lynching succeeded slavery as the 
     ultimate expression of racism in the United States following 
     Reconstruction;
       Whereas lynching was a common practice in the United States 
     until the middle of the 20th century;
       Whereas lynching was a crime that occurred throughout the 
     Nation, with documented incidents in all but 4 States;
       Whereas at least 4,749 people, predominantly African-
     Americans, were reported lynched in the United States between 
     1881 and 1964;
       Whereas 99 percent of all lynch mob perpetrators escaped 
     any form of punishment from State or local officials;
       Whereas lynching prompted African-Americans to form the 
     National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 
     (NAACP) and prompted members of B'nai B'rith to found the 
     Anti-Defamation League;
       Whereas nearly 200 anti-lynching bills were introduced in 
     Congress during the first half of the 20th century;
       Whereas between 1890 and 1952, 7 Presidents petitioned 
     Congress to end lynching;

[[Page 19848]]

       Whereas between 1920 and 1940, the House of Representatives 
     passed 3 strong anti-lynching measures;
       Whereas protection against lynching was the minimum and 
     most basic of Federal responsibilities, yet the Senate failed 
     to enact anti-lynching legislation despite repeated requests 
     by civil rights groups, Presidents, and the House of 
     Representatives;
       Whereas until the recent publication of ``Without 
     Sanctuary: Lynching Photography in America'', the victims of 
     lynching have never been properly acknowledged;
       Whereas only by coming to terms with its history can the 
     United States effectively champion human rights abroad; and
       Whereas an apology offered in the spirit of true repentance 
     moves the Nation toward reconciliation and may become central 
     to a new understanding upon which improved racial relations 
     can be forged: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the Senate--
       (1) apologizes to the victims and survivors of lynching for 
     its failure to enact anti-lynching legislation;
       (2) expresses its deepest sympathies and most solemn 
     regrets to the descendants of victims of lynching whose 
     ancestors were deprived of life, human dignity, and the 
     constitutional protections accorded all other citizens of the 
     United States; and
       (3) remembers the history of lynching, to ensure that these 
     personal tragedies will be neither forgotten nor repeated.

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, it has been said that ``ignorance, 
allied with power, is the most ferocious enemy justice can have.'' 
Sadly, this great body, in which I am so proud to serve, once allied 
its power with ignorance. In so doing, it condoned unspeakable 
injustice that diminished the role of the Senate, and heaped untold 
suffering on Americans sorely in need of our protection. I am referring 
to the Senate's role in the decades long campaign to end lynching in 
this country. On three separate occasions, our colleagues in the House 
of Representatives passed anti-lynching legislation with overwhelming 
majorities. On all three of those occasions members of this Chamber 
blocked, or filibustered the consideration of that legislation.
  Between 1882, when records first began to be collected, and 1968 four 
thousand, seven hundred and forty-two Americans lost their lives to 
lynch mobs. The experts believe that undocumented cases might double 
that figure. The vast majority of those killed--three thousand, four 
hundred and forty-five Americans--were African American. Sadly, a 
disproportionate number of those deaths occurred within my home region 
of the South, but 46 of the 50 States experienced these atrocities. 
Lynching was truly a national problem deserving the attention of the 
national legislative bodies.
  Frederick Douglas seems to have captured the real reason for this 
dark period of our national history. These acts of terrorism were not 
so much an admission of African Americans' weakness, but of their 
perseverance--and indomitable spirit. Douglas wrote: It is proof that 
the Negro is not standing still. He is not dead, but alive and active. 
He is not drifting with the current, but manfully resisting it . . . A 
ship rotting at anchor meets with no resistance, but when she sails on 
the sea, she has to buffet opposing billows. The enemies of the Negro 
see that he is making progress and they naturally wish to stop him and 
keep him in just what they consider his proper place.
  It was, in short, the ability of African Americans to overcome Jim 
Crow laws, to overcome share-cropping, to overcome second-class 
citizenship that provoked such savagery. Its an old story that repeats 
itself throughout human history. Whether it was the Israelites in 
Egypt, the colonial empires in Africa or America's own history of 
Apartheid, rulers that assume superiority inevitably prove themselves 
models of mankind's basest instincts.
  It should also be noted that this was not only an outrage committed 
against African Americans. The effort to dehumanize people on the basis 
of race or ethnicity did not limit itself to black Americans. In fact, 
the single largest incident of lynching occurred in my home state, in 
my home town of New Orleans. Yet, the victims were not black. They were 
Italians. On March 14, 1891, 11 Italian immigrants were lynched in the 
City of New Orleans. These immigrants too were thought to be less than 
human, and were simply rounded up as a group of the ``usual suspects'' 
following the murder of Police Superintendent David Hennessy. Already 
edgy from a media prompted mafia scare, a mob surrounded the prison and 
eventually battered down the doors. An armed group of twenty-five men 
overtook the guards and summarily riddled the bodies of the 11 Italian 
prisoners with bullets. Their bodies were hung on lampposts outside the 
prison. Eyewitnesses described the cheering of the crowd as deafening.
  Of course, the attacks on that day are an example of mob justice and 
its irrational prejudices. However, in nearly 25 percent of all 
lynchings the motivations of the attackers came down to a bald attempt 
to maintain a caste system in this country. The NAACP cataloged the 
reported motivations for these forms of attack. They included: using 
disrespectful, insulting, slanderous, boastful, threatening or 
incendiary language; insubordination, impertinence, or improper 
demeanor, a sarcastic grin, laughing at the wrong place, a prolonged 
silence; refusing to take off one's hat to a white person or to give 
the right-of-way when encountering a white on the sidewalk; resisting 
assault by whites; being troublesome generally; disorderly conduct, 
petty theft or drunkenness; writing an improper letter to a white 
person; paying undue or improper attention to a white female; accusing 
a white man of writing love letters to a black woman; or living or 
keeping company with a white woman; turning or refusing to turn state's 
evidence; testifying or bringing suit against a white person; being 
related to a person accused of a crime and already lynched; political 
activities; union organizing; conjuring; discussing a lynching; 
gambling; operating a house of ill fame; a personal debt; refusing to 
accept an employment offer; vagrancy; refusing to give up one's farm; 
conspicuously displaying one's wealth or property; and trying to act 
like a white man.
  In many instances, lynchings were little more than a way to remove an 
economic competitor and confiscate his property. This was true in a 
number of cases in Mississippi involving successful African American 
landowners, and in one notorious Hawaiian case involving a Japanese 
immigrant competing with established white businessmen.
  Many of my colleagues might wonder why now? After all, some of these 
incidents are over a century old. There are two reasons. First, this 
aspect of American history is not well known or understood. As 
reconstruction concluded in the South, a very ugly struggle to reassert 
the social structure that preceded the Civil War took place. A great 
deal of it occurred with the tacit consent of the Federal Government, 
and the most part, the media either shared in the common prejudice, or 
simply ignored what was occurring.
  Fortunately, we have the publication of the book ``Without 
Sanctuary'' by James Allen, Hilton Als, Congressman John Lewis, and 
Leon F. Litwak to serve as a focal point for our attention to this 
neglected history. This is a difficult book to examine. It serves as a 
catalog of inhuman crime perpetrated by very ordinary citizens. Looking 
at anything so tragic as the victims of these crimes would be 
disturbing, but that is not what will leave a lasting impression. It is 
the festive attitude, the smiles and smirks on the crowd gathered 
around the victim. They clearly take a perverse pride in this act. 
Hannah Arendt, the famous political philosopher, subtitled her book on 
Adolph Eichman's war crimes trials ``A Report on the Banality of 
Evil.'' When you look at the expressions on the faces of the murderers 
in these photos, that is all you can think about. These are not crazed 
killers, these are rational people going about their everyday lives, 
and committing unspeakable acts in the process.
  Photos like these serve to remind us that a healthy society is not 
something that is built up over time, and then like a great monument, 
exists for centuries. Rather, a healthy society is a thin levee that 
must be constantly improved and maintained to hold back the worst 
instincts of mankind. I think the horrible pictures that came from Abu 
Gharib prison served as a reminder

[[Page 19849]]

of this lesson. This book is even greater testimony that atrocities are 
not events that only occur in far off places. They can and have 
occurred here in the United States.
  The only way to maintain a healthy society is to acknowledge and 
discuss our mistakes. No one would defend the Senate's filibuster of 
anti-lynching legislation today. I would like to think that any Senator 
who did so would quickly be looking for another line of work. However, 
despite the change of attitude we have taken no action to remedy our 
wrong. That is the purpose of this resolution today. I would like to 
extend my deep thanks to my courageous colleague, the Junior Senator 
from Virginia. He seemed to instantly understand the significance of 
this effort, and I believed it was vitally important to proceed with 
this resolution in a bipartisan manner. His input and drive have made 
this effort much more successful than it otherwise would have been.
  It is our intention to submit this legislation today, and use the 
recess period to confer with our colleagues about it. When we reconvene 
next year, we will resubmit this resolution, and at that time, we hope 
to have the co-sponsorship of every member of this body. Then, we will 
endeavor to enact the resolution to commemorate Black History month.
  I said ignorance allied with power is justice's most ferocious enemy. 
Yet imagine what truth allied with power can bring. For over 50 years, 
African American achievement was seen as a threat to the majority of 
people in this nation. It is time to close the book on that tragic 
period and begin to celebrate the achievements of black Americans as 
accomplishments that have bettered us all. I believe that this 
resolution of apology will be an important symbolic step in this 
process of healing and growth.
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of an 
anti-lynching resolution that Ms. Landrieu and I are submitting. Like 
all of my colleagues, I am proud to be a member of this Chamber, not 
for its grandeur, but because of the grand ideas it represents. It is 
here, on these same small desks where big ideas have been debated and 
argued through the course of our history for the greater good of our 
Nation. It is here in this Chamber, on this floor, where our Democracy 
reaches consensus from what our Founding Fathers called, the ``Will of 
the People.''
  In the history of this Chamber, there have been many great minds and 
defenders of Freedom. One of those whose words still reverberate here 
today is Daniel Webster. Standing in the old Senate Chamber, Webster 
told his colleagues in 1834 that a ``representative of the people is a 
sentinel on the watch tower of liberty.''
  I know that Webster was right. I believe throughout our history, the 
United States Senate has been a watchtower on Liberty. It has been 
venerated as the World's greatest deliberative body. The formidable 
British Member of Parliament, William Gladstone called the American 
Senate, ``that remarkable body, the most remarkable of all the 
inventions of modern politics.''
  But unfortunately, this august body has a dark stain on its history. 
A stain that was borne of hatred, racism, and the blood of mostly 
African Americans who died from a noose, from flogging, from a torch, 
from the evil heart of men.
  I rise today to offer a formal and heartfelt apology to all the 
victims of lynchings in our history--black, white, Jewish, Indian, 
Hispanic and Asian and the failure of the U.S. Senate to take action 
when action was most deserved.
  The term ``lynching'' has its roots in my own beloved Commonwealth. 
Charles Lynch, a Virginia planter during the Revolutionary War meted 
out his own form of justice without a court. In Bedford County, Lynch 
persecuted Tories and Tory sympathizers without trial.
  Soon, others who desired to thwart the rule of law and to trample on 
the rights of the accused used ``lynchings'' against the innocent or 
lightly accused.
  This body stood by as these vile killings captivated front-page 
headlines, drew crowds with morbid curiosity and left thousands of 
mostly African Americans hanging from trees or bleeding to death from 
the lashings of whips. This body failed to act and in not acting, 
failed to protect the Liberty of which Webster spoke.
  According to the archives of Tuskegee Institute, 4,749 Americans died 
by lynching starting in 1882. Two-thirds of these lynchings were 
perpetrated against black men, women, and children. Many were not lone 
acts by a few white men, but angry mobs whipped into frenzies by skewed 
mentalities of right and wrong.
  One of those who suffered this awful fate was an African American 
named Zachariah Walker of Coatesville, VA. In 1911, Walker was dragged 
from a hospital bed where he was recovering from a gunshot wound. 
Accused of killing a white man--which he claimed was in self-defense--
Walker was burned alive at the stake without a trial.
  Such horrendous acts were not a regional phenomenon. Yes, it is true 
that most lynchings took place in Southern States. But, Illinois, Ohio, 
Michigan and even this city of Washington, D.C. experienced mob 
violence, making lynching not just a regional problem, but a national 
crime.
  Yet, despite the national scope of these acts, the U.S. Senate failed 
to pass one of the estimated 200 anti-lynching bills introduced in 
Congress in the first half of the Twentieth Century. Three strong 
pieces of legislation were passed by the other body, but faced 
filibusters and failures to reach cloture on this Senate floor.
  In the winter of 1937-38, one grisly lynching captivated this body's 
attention. The crime had happened in Mississippi the previous April. 
Two African Americans were taken from a jail. They were whipped and 
torched. Senator Champ Clark of Missouri posted photographs of the 
brutality back here in the cloakroom. For six weeks, this body debated. 
For six weeks! In the end, those in favor of an anti-lynching bill 
failed to enact cloture over the filibustering of others.
  Historians will no doubt disagree as to a single reason that U.S. 
Senators blocked legislation to make lynching a federal crime. My 
desire here is not to get into motivations.
  Regardless of their reasoning, our reason tells us that it was wrong 
and it is time to right it.
  Thankfully, justice in our Nation has moved forward and left such 
despicable acts to history. But, this story can never be complete 
without an acknowledgement from this body that it failed to protect 
individual freedoms and rights.
  It ignored the protection our Founding Fathers extended to those 
accused of crimes and the bedrock foundation of our system of justice 
that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. And, it turned its back 
on the most helpless in our society at a time when the weak needed 
protection.
  I stand here today as a proud Senator from a Southern State. I look 
around this chamber and know of its abundance of honor and integrity 
throughout its history. Yet, we have not been perfect, especially on 
this issue. We failed our American ideals and we failed our citizens.
  As Ephesians teaches us, ``all things that are reproved are made 
manifest by the light.''
  My fellow Senators, this apology is too long in coming. I 
respectfully urge all of us to reprove this omission of history as a 
strong step never to be repeated in our future.
                                 ______
                                 

SENATE RESOLUTION 443--TO AUTHORIZE TESTIMONY, DOCUMENT PRODUCTION, AND 
        LEGAL REPRESENTATION IN UNITED STATES V. ROBERTO MARTIN

  Mr. FRIST (for himself and Mr. Daschle) submitted the following 
resolution; which was considered and agreed to:

                              S. Res. 443

       Whereas, in the case of United States v. Roberto Martin,  
     Crim. No. 04-CR-20075, pending in Federal District Court in 
     the Southern District of Florida, testimony and documents 
     have been requested from an employee in the office of Senator 
     Bob Graham;

[[Page 19850]]

       Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the 
     Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 288b(a) 
     and 288c(a)(2), the Senate may direct its counsel to 
     represent employees of the Senate with respect to any 
     subpoena, order, or request for testimony relating to their 
     official responsibilities;
       Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United 
     States and Rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no 
     evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate 
     may, by the judicial or administrative process, be taken from 
     such control or possession but by permission of the Senate;
       Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or 
     in the possession of the Senate may promote the 
     administration of justice, the Senate will take such action 
     as will promote the ends of justice consistent with the 
     privileges of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved that employees of Senator Graham's office from 
     whom testimony or the production of documents may be required 
     are authorized to testify and produce documents in the case 
     of United States v. Roberto Martin, except concerning matters 
     for which a privilege should be asserted.
       Sec. 2. The Senate Legal Counsel is authorized to represent 
     Senator Graham's staff in the action referenced in section 
     one of this resolution.
                                 ______
                                 

 SENATE RESOLUTION 444--CONGRATULATING AND COMMENDING THE VETERANS OF 
FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED STATES AND ITS NATIONAL COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF, 
                       JOHN FURGESS OF TENNESSEE

  Mr. FRIST (for himself, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Specter, Mr. Alexander, and 
Mr. Reid) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
agreed to:

                              S. Res. 444

       Whereas the organization now known as the Veterans of 
     Foreign Wars of the United States (``VFW'') was founded in 
     Columbus, Ohio, on September 29, 1899;
       Whereas the VFW represents approximately 2,000,000 veterans 
     of the Armed Forces who served overseas in World War I, World 
     War II, Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf War, Bosnia, Iraq, 
     and Afghanistan; and
       Whereas the VFW has, for the past 105 years, provided 
     voluntary and unselfish service to the Armed Forces and to 
     veterans, communities, States, and the United States, and has 
     worked toward the betterment of veterans in general and 
     society as a whole: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the Senate--
       (1) recognizes the historic significance of the 105th 
     anniversary of the founding of the Veterans of Foreign Wars 
     of the United States (``VFW'');
       (2) congratulates the VFW on achieving that milestone;
       (3) commends the approximately 2,000,000 veterans who 
     belong to the VFW and thanks them for their service to their 
     fellow veterans and the United States; and
       (4) recognizes the VFW's national Commander-in-Chief, John 
     Furgess, for his service and dedication to the veterans of 
     the United States.

                          ____________________