One Man's Stand

Rarely has one man's vote been watched so closely as Barry Goldwater's on the civil rights bill. He had thought about it long and hard. "I really wanted to be able to vote for the bill," he told a newsman. "This week I've asked every lawyer friend I know to show me some constitutional justification for it. The answer is always: 'All you can say is that you feel a majority of the people are for it, and so you're going to vote for it on that basis.' But that's not enough. I just can't go along with just that."

Goldwater had consistently sided with Democratic segregationists in their proposed amendments to the measure. Now he had decided to vote against the bill itself. But first he had to explain his stand in a Senate speech.

Police State? Reading rapidly and tonelessly, Goldwater declared that he had always been "unalterably opposed to discrimination." But he insisted that the real remedy lay in the good will in the human heart. The legislation that reached the Senate after passage in the House, he said, was produced by "sledgehammer political tactics." He had hoped that it would be modified by "what was once considered to be the greatest deliberative body on earth." But it was apparent "that emotion and political pressure, not persuasion, not common sense, not deliberation, had become the rule of the day and of the processes of this great body." The Senate, he charged, had ignored the Constitution and "the fundamental concepts of our governmental system. My basic objection to this measure is, therefore, constitutional."

Goldwater was bitter about the bill's public accommodations and fair employment provisions. These, he warned, would require the creation of a federal police force of mammoth proportions, would result in a "police state" and an "informer" psychology--"neighbors spying on neighbors, workers spying on workers, businessmen spying on businessmen, where those who would harass their fellow citizens for selfish and narrow purposes will have ample inducement to do so."

"The Real Concern." Even Goldwater's harshest critics agreed that he was taking his stand on the basis of conviction, letting the political chips fall where they might. But his vote did demonstrate dramatically just how far he is removed from the mainstream of U.S. and Republican Party thinking.

The civil rights bill was, after all, the product of national demand in the light of the Negro revolution of 1963 and '64. Republican platforms and declarations of principle have long been strong for civil rights. In the House of Representatives, Republican Leader Charles Halleck had gone down the line for the bill, and 138 out of 172 voting Republicans approved it. In the Senate, G.O.P. Leader Dirksen was the main architect of amending the bill into its final form, and Barry was one of a mere six Republican Senators who finally voted against it.

Goldwater was, of course, aware of all this, but he felt that in good conscience he had no choice. Concluded he in his justification speech: "If my vote is misconstrued, let it be, and let me suffer its consequences. Just let me be judged in this by the real concern I have voiced here and not by words that others may speak or by what others may say about what I think."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.