Freedom's Pragmatist: Lyndon Johnson and Civil Rights

2. Civil Rights in Texas: The House Years

34 2 Civil Rights in Texas The House Years Politics is the art of the possible. Otto Van Bismarck To get along, you’ve got to go along. Sam Rayburn In his memoirs, published shortly after he left office, Johnson offered a defense of his record on civil rights during his years in the House of Representatives based on his southern background. He wrote that he had not been raised in a home that hankered after the “old South” of plantations and “darkies,” and he was proud to say that he “was part of Texas”: his “roots were in its soil,” and he had “a special identification with its history and its people.” But he was willing to recognize that his “Southern heritage meant a great deal. . . . It gave me a feeling of belonging and a sense of continuity. But it also created—sadly, but perhaps inevitably— certain parochial feelings that flared up defensively whenever Northerners described the South as ‘a blot on our national conscience’ or ‘a stain on our country’s democracy.’ . . . These were emotions I took with me to the Congress when I voted against six civil rights bills that came up on the House and the Senate floor.” Johnson justified his actions further by writing that he was not convinced that legislation was the best way to change the racial dynamics of the South—and in any case, he felt somewhat powerless to act on civil rights during these years. As he put it, Civil Rights in Texas: The House Years · 35 “I did not think there was much I could do as a lone Congressman from Texas. I represented a conservative constituency. One heroic stand and I’d be back home, defeated, unable to do any good for anyone, much less the blacks and the underprivileged. As a Representative and a Senator, before I became Majority Leader, I did not have the power. That is a plain and simple fact.” This was, of course, Johnson’s ex post facto rationalization of his strict alignment with the southern voting bloc. But does this argument—that it was simply a matter of powerlessness and cultural defensiveness—explain all of his actions on race during his eleven years in Congress? Or were there other explanations for his behavior? His record during this time is clear—he did not support any civil rights legislation. And yet, as this chapter will show, Johnson did not abandon African Americans in his constituency. Entering Congress For most of his time in the House of Representatives, on race, Johnson followed the line of those whose judgment he most trusted: President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Congressman Sam Rayburn. By the time Johnson entered the House in May 1937 Roosevelt was already his political hero. He viewed FDR as not only his commander in chief, to whom the nation owed a great debt, but also as a friend and mentor. Johnson supported the New Deal programs, not least because he had witnessed firsthand how ordinary Texans had benefited from them, but also because he had a deep admiration for the president’s use of executive and federal power to combat the nation’s social and economic problems. Shortly before entering Congress, Johnson had an important opportunity to demonstrate his loyalty to the president. On February 2, 1937, Roosevelt made a speech on the Supreme Court in which he pointed out that seven of the nine judges had been appointed by Republican presidents and that the majority were over seventy years of age. He announced that he would ask Congress to expand the Court by adding one judge for every sitting member over seventy who had served ten years (with a maximum of six new judges). This controversial plan was quickly labeled a “court-packing scheme” and was opposed vehemently in the South, where it was feared Roosevelt’s new appointees would be liberals who might lead the Court to rule against such race measures as the poll tax. Despite the political furor, Johnson stood behind the president on this. When he swore his congressional oath of office on May 13, 1937, 36 · Freedom’s Pragmatist he was introduced to Congress by Maury Maverick as someone who had “supported the President’s judiciary plan and was overwhelmingly elected.” It would not help save the president’s scheme for court reform, as the Senate defeated the Judiciary Reorganization Bill...