Slowly, I've make my way through a large collection of Dr. King's major speeches.
What astounded me was that even in the Editor's introduction, John Ashcroft
jumped out at me from almost every page.! The "injustice" that he perpetuated when
he was the State Attoreny General for Missouri and its Governor when he refused to provide equality in
the schools for black and white children reinforces my belief that Ashcroft's
view towards black Americans is merely one of tokenism.
It is very easy to sit on a comfortable chair in a plush office and sign a document that says
Missouri will join other Americans and celebrate a day that will honor Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
It is also very easy to sit on a comfortable chair behind an expensive desk
and sign documents that will appoint black judges.
However, it has not been easy for Mr. Ashcroft to spend money that would
make black and white schools equal through desegregation. And certainly, it wasn't
easy for Mr. Ashcroft to replace schools that were in ruins. Ashcroft balked at the idea of rebuilding
the schools.. He complained that it would cost too much money.
He opposed VOLUNTARY desegregation. And he bragged about it. Actually, he always had
an excuse for not enforcing the civil rights laws.
This is black history month. The year is 2001. Yet, Dr. King's words are as true today
as they were in 1968 when he wrote:
"America is reaping the harvest of hate and shame planted through generations
of educational denial, political disfranchisement and economic exploitation of its black
population."
Excerpt from SHOWDOWN FOR NONVIOLENCE. (Editor's Note:
Dr. King had already been assassinated by James Earl Ray in Memphis, Tennessee,
on 4th April 1968 when this article appeared.)
In the Editor's introduction, James M. Washington writes:
"No other black leader, however, has quite equaled the rich social and religious
artistry of Martin Luther King, Jr. He was indeed a world historical
figure. He captured the spotlight of history precisely at the right time, and
responded with a blueprint for what America could become if it trusted its
democratic legacy. His dream proved to be too threatening. It implied a massive
redistribution of wealth and resources. He was murdered."
(The above excerpt from A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin
Luther King, Jr., edited by James Melvin Washington. Copyright 1986 by Coretta
Scott King.)
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was murdered. John Ashcroft is the Attorney General for
The United States. Dr. King's death and Ashcroft's ascent to the position
of Attorney General are terrible injustices for all Americans.
JMOP
Mephisto
******************************************************************************************
Ashcroft's Accuracy on Desegregation Challenged
By Dan Eggen and David A. Vise
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, January 18, 2001 ; Page A12
From The Washington Post
In his opening testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee this week, attorney general nominee
John D. Ashcroft vigorously defended his fight against a landmark voluntary desegregation plan
in St. Louis, arguing the state had "done nothing wrong" and "had been found guilty of no wrong"
in the case.
But court documents show that a federal district judge ruled that the state was
a "primary constitutional wrongdoer" in perpetuating segregated schools in St. Louis,
both by denying blacks an equal education in the past and doing little to remedy the situation later.
Appellate courts repeatedly upheld that conclusion, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear
three appeals initiated by Ashcroft while he was the state's attorney general.
These and other discrepancies related to Ashcroft's opposition to desegregation plans in
St. Louis and Kansas City have emerged as a key point of contention between Democratic
and Republican senators during this week's hearings.
Ashcroft said Tuesday, for example, that "in all of the cases where the court made an order,
I followed the order, both as attorney general and as governor."
But U.S. District Judge William Hungate threatened to hold
Ashcroft -- who was Missouri's attorney general – and the state in contempt in 1981
for "continual delay and failure to comply" with orders to file a desegregation plan.
"The state has, as a matter of deliberate policy, decided to defy the authority of this court,"
Hungate wrote in a subsequent
order.
In a town forum three years later during his run for governor,
Ashcroft said he had done "everything in my power legally"
TO FIGHT THE DESEGREGATION PLAN, according to a wire service account.
."Just ask Judge Hungate, who threatened me with contempt,"
he said.
Ashcroft repeated his assertion yesterday that he had always complied
with court orders, but acknowledged that he had mounted
what he considered valid legal challenges to desegregation plans.
Ashcroft also sought yesterday to "clarify" other statements he made Tuesday,
when he repeatedly told the committee that Missouri "had never been a party to the litigation"
surrounding the St. Louis plan.
In fact, Missouri became a defendant in the case in 1977,
during Ashcroft's first term as attorney general.
The battles over both districts extend back to lawsuits filed in the 1970s, in an era when
Missouri's Constitution still included a segregation clause. Federal judges ordered and
oversaw desegregation plans in both cities, including voluntary busing and magnet schools
in St. Louis and a massive rebuilding effort in Kansas City, which was funded in part by
tax increases ordered by the courts.
ASHCROFT vigorously fought both plans, arguing that racial disparities were not
the lingering effects of legal segregation and routinely chiding HUNGATE and other federal
judges for the COSTS.
In addition to making opposition to VOLUNTARY busing in St. Louis
a major theme in his inaugural run for governor in 1984,
he lobbied the Reagan Justice Department to join one of his FAILLED ATTEMPTS
to reverse the decision.
"I've been involved in dozens of cases for 30 years, and I have never
seen a public official act the way Ashcroft did," said Gary A. Orfield,
a Harvard University desegregation expert who helped craft
the St. Louis plan. "The SCHOOLS WERE IN RUINS, and there was
nothing but denial and obfuscation and obstruction at every stage from the state."
Orfield and other critics argue that Ashcroft, by dragging out
compliance with court orders and angering federal judges
in two jurisdictions, is largely responsible for desegregation costs
to the state that surpassed $2.5 billion, according to most estimates.
Ashcroft's successor, Democratic Gov. Mel Carnahan, settled both cases in 1999.
In his testimony to the committee, Ashcroft said he fought the
desegregation plans because he felt federal judges had exceeded their authority,
that the state had been ordered to shoulder an unfair portion of the cost and
that racial imbalances were caused by white flight unconnected to state actions.
"I opposed a mandate by the federal government that the state, which had done nothing
wrong . . . should be asked to pay this very substantial sum of money over a long course of years,"
Ashcroft said Tuesday in reference to the St. Louis case. "I have always opposed segregation. I have never opposed integration."
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) has spent much of his speaking time in the past two days attacking Ashcroft's "relentless opposition" and "scorched-earth" legal challenges to the St. Louis plan.
"My question is, how costly was this going to be, Senator Ashcroft, before you were going
to say that those kids were going in lousy schools, that you were going to do something about it?" Kennedy thundered on Tuesday.
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) said Kennedy had taken Ashcroft's comments and actions out of context.
© 2001 The Washington Post |
