Lobbyists Press for Civil Rights Bill

WASHINGTON, Oct. 21--An important scoop on the civil rights bill was among the unexpected rewards picked up by the eight Harvard lobbyists for John W. Perdew '64 in their conversations with Congressmen, here today.

Rep. Roland Libonati (D-III.), at the end of 75 minutes of nearly straight talking late in the afternoon, told the students that he would withdraw his amendment to the voting rights section of the House Judiciary Subcommittee's proposed civil rights bill.

The amendment has weakened the voting rights section of the bill, making most of the section's provisions apply only to federal elections, instead of both federal and state elections. If passed by the full House Judiciary Commitee, which begins work on the bill this morning, it would have brought the sub-committee proposal much closer to the narrower version supported by the Administration.

Libonati's announcement came as a surprise to the students, who had gone into his office expecting to argue against the amendment. And this was not the only surprise of the day.

The eight students drove to Washing ton late Sunday expecting to lobby for Title X of the sub-committee bill, a measure designed to prevent segregationalist federal judges from blocking removal to federal courts in civil rights cases.

But on arriving in the Capital they were advised by William L. Higgs, L.L.D. '53, a civil rights attorney working in Washington, to drop Title X and throw their support behind more controversial parts of the bill. Title X, Higgs said, had enough support already.

Accepting the advice, the group switched its strategy and pressed a strong Title III" in their interviews--either the Judiciary Sub-committee's Title III or a slightly weaker version proposed by Sen. Jacob Javits (R.N.Y.). A strong Title III would give the U.S. Attorney-General power to intervene in the Perdew case, enjoining Georgia's state courts not to enforce a State insurrection law under which Perdew and two other civil rights workers are facing a possible death sentence.

The students managed to talk in person with 10 Congressmen during the day, most of them judiciary committee members who were undecided between a strong Title III and the Administration's version, which applies only to school desegregation cases. But they spent many additional hours running up and down the halls of the two House office buildings, being told by smiling secretaries and "legislative assistants" that the Congressmen were not in, or too busy, and trying vainly to call Congressmen off the floor of the House.

A few generalizations about the interviews emerged after ten weary hours of lobbying. Carry Bullard '64 expressed surprise that "so few people seemed to be lobbying for civil rights at this crucial time." He also said that most judiciary committee members "seemed badly informed on the bill in view of the fact that it is in their own committee and has got so much publicity."

All the lobbyists thought they had made an impression on some Congressmen, but a few Congressmen, particularly Rep. William McCullough (R-Ohio) and Rep. George Senner (D-Arix.), were so firmly committed to the Administration's bill that they were not receptive to the students' argument. McCullough and Libonate did most of the talking themselves.

The student lobbyists, all Class of '64, were: Bullard, Alfred J. Alcorn, Peter A. Busch, Morton P. Thomas, John G. Womack, Frederick B. Jufnagel, and Marshall L. Gans