s. FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC CLUBS TO: ALL FRIENDS OF THE MFDP FROM: THE MISSISSIPPI FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC PARTY
We are enclosing a report explaining the role of the M^DP at the Convention in Atlantic City and tho plans of the MFDP for the future. We hope that this report will help you understand more fully the position and focu3 of the MFDP.
As the Convention made clear, there are many things that you in the North can do to help the MFDP. There is tho obvious and omnipresent need for nonoy and supplies. In the next few weeks we will bo running 5 campaigns for Senate and the House of Representatives. And poverty in Mississippi means not only that people are poor, but that they have no money with which to help themselves. We must have material support from outsido the state if we are to keop pace with tho growing strength of organization among the people thorns.Ives,
Wo also need political support. Because we had that support, wo made the Democratic National Convention stand still for four days, and received tho coverage in press and television we so vitally needed. But we lost the battlo at the Convontion.
Now we are workinr to challenge the. Mississippi representatives to Senate and the Congress. If we aro to win this battle against tho Regular Democratic Party of Mississippi, we must have pressuro from you on tho President and on tho repre sentatives of the National Democratic Party in your state. But it is most important to remember that the members of the MFDP are Mississippi Negroes first and foremost, and it is this condition that shapes their lives. Unless the state itself changes, thoir lives cannot improve - and the state will not change without pressure from tho rest of tho country.
You must help by making sure the people of the MFDP are not forgotton, by insisting that the story of Mississippi continue to bo told, and by calling for the kind of Federal presence that will bring Freedom to those people's lives.
Freedom Democratic Party 852 | Short St root Jackson, Mississippi FDP r-v.. THE CONVENTION CHALLENGE
Many friends of the FDP have expressed concern and confusion as to why the FDP delegation at Atlantic City refused to accept the decision of the Credentials Committee, That decision gave Dr. Aaron Henry and Rev. Ed King votes as Delegates-At-Large, required that the Regular Democratic Party of Mississippi pledge support to Johnson Humphrey in November, and provided for a committee to work on requiring that at the 1968 convention all delegates be chosen through processes which do not exclude Negro registered voters. In analyzing why the PDF did not accept this compromise, it is important to understand first what the FDP delegation represent ed and what it accomplished at the convention. The FDP delegation was not Simply an "alternative" delegation chosen by Negro instead of white Mississippians. The FDP is not a Negro party, but an integrated party, open to all whites. It grows directlv out of the civil rights movement in Mississippi. It came to Atlantic City demanding, not simply that Negroes ho represented, hut that racism be ended - in Mississippi and in the Do-pocratic Party. Moreover, tho conditions under which the FDP delegation was chosen wero certainly unicuo. Though the FDP delegation was chosen according to the laws of Mississippi, its role was only partially political. This is so because simply to take part in the political process of tho state makes the Negro in Mississippi automatically a rebel against the segregated society. This mo no that he is in immediate and grave danp.er of losing his job, his home, and possibly his life. Many of those who represented the FDP at Atlantic City havo suffered the most brutal and continual reprisals ever since they began working for their political rights'. This lends a peculiar and unique air to their efforts to attend the Convention, and means that they were literally gambling thoir lives against the right of being seated in Atlantic City. The third thing that must be understood is that the FDP had tho support it needed to Win the fight at Atlantic City. Within tho Credentials Committee their was sufficient support to get the FDP's demands on the floor of the Convention, through tho signing of a minority report. On tho floor, thoro was sufficient support to force a roll call voto. Once a roll call was allowed, most observers agreed that the ^DP would havo boon seated. What prevented this was the most massive pressure from tho White House, through tho mediation of Hubert Humphrey. The FDP delegation was aware of all of this, and it therefore know that the leadership of the party and the Convention was denying it what in fact it had tho popular support to win. This kind of dictation is what Negroes In Mississippi faco and have always faced, and it is precisely this that thoy are learning to stand up against. X The specific reasons for the rejection of the Committee's decision follow:
1. Supporters of tho compromise argued that the two seat;us would have great symbolic value. But 68 symbols would have been a lot better than two. We oust stop playing the game of accepting token recognition for real change and of allowing the opposition to choose a fow "loaders" to represent the people at large - especially if, as at the Convontion, tho opposition is all white and tho pooplo are all Negro. If the people are going to be heard in this country, then we must make the country talk with and listen to them, and not a handpicked committee. The people sent 68 representatives that they choso In open convention. The delegation could not violate that trust. 2. Tho first provision of that compromise was that the Regular delegation would be fully seated and recognized. The FDP did not go to Atlantic City to vote for a proposal which would recognize tho Regular party as tho Democratic representa tive in Mississippi, The FDP came to unseat the regulars because they don't represent the people of Mississippi, Even the two seats offered to the FDP would not havo been Mississippi votes, but merely votes at large, 3. The compromise made pretense at setting up means of challenging delegations in 1968 from states which interfere with Negro participation in the party. But tho Credentials Committee, in private talks with the FDP delegation, said that it would not guarantee a single registered voter added to the lists in the next four years. Loss than 6 percent of voting- age Negroes arc now registered in tho state. In order to participate in regular democratic party politics In Mississippi you must be a registered voter. Tho compromise proposal dealt only with "voters". So, oven if Negroes are permitted to attend meetings in 196° to prove the party is "open", they don't stand any real chanco of having a voice in thodocision of that party. k* Some supporters of the compromise argued that ths FDP was ro presenting all Nogroos in the country and the two seats offered would mean a lot to them in the Northern cities, where rioting has been taking place. But the 68 persons came to Atlan ic City to represent the Negroes of Mississippi and not tho country as a whole. That is the nature of all delegations at tho convention. It is unreasonable to ask the Mississippi delegation to boar the burdon of the entire country - ospecially since it is one of tho most powerless groups in tho country to actually affoct conditions. There is no roason why tho Nogroes of Mississippi should be sacrificed on the altar of national politics, 5. The compromise offered no precedent for the future, especially since it WPS not baaed on any precedent in the past. It offered tho WDP nothing in the way of permanent recognition, patronage, official status or a guarantee of participation in tho 1968 convontion. The compromise was a completely one-shot affair; the FDP is not. 2. 6. Tho committoe set up to review such matters for tho 19^8 convention has no official status or power with regard to the I96O convention. It ma;; look good on paper, but its strength lies there on the oaoer and nowhere else.
7. The compromise was an effort by tho -^dministration1j« led by President Johnson, to prevent a floor fight on tho issue at tho convention. Tho compromise was not designed to deal with the issues raised by the FDP in challenging tho regular delegation. Tho FDP delegation cane to Atlantic City to raise the issue of racism, not simply to demand rocognition. It could not accept a token decision which had as its goal tho avoidance of the question of racism.
Finally it must be understood that tho FDP delegation did not come to Atlantic City bogcring for crumbs. They came demanding full riaht3, for themselves and for 1,000,000 other human beings. Thoy would have accepted any honorable compromise between reason able men. The tost was not whether tho FDP could accept "political realism'', but rather whether the Convention and the National Democratic "arty Could accept the challenge presented by tho FDP. Tho Convontion and tho National Democratic Darty failed that tost.
PLANS OF THE MISSISSIPPI FREEDOM DER0CRATIC PARTY
Under tho impetus of the ConVontion Challenge at Atlantic City, the Freedom Democratic Party has undergone great growth and solidification throughout Mississippi. Local leadership is taking over a larger and larger share of the organisational work of tho party and the related efforts of voter registration and education. District, County, and Precinct meetings aro being held all over the state fo further those programs. The main task of tho FDP in tho next few months will be to soo that focus is given to tho political work art that materials aro available to further the educational program. Those efforts will center around the Freedom Vote and tho now Freedom Primers.
THE FREED0 I VOTE
The main effort of tho FDP in the next six weeks will bo a Freedom Vote to bo hold October 31 -nd November 1 and 2. Ths freedom Vote will bo open to all peoolo, Negro and white, register ed or unregistered, who are at least 21 and residents of Missis sippi* Lyndon Johnson and Hubert Humphrey will be placed against Barry Goldwater and William Miller in the Freedom Vote. The FDP will also run Dr. Aaron Henry for tho Senate, Mr. Harold Roby for Congress in tho 1st District, Mrs. Fannie Lou Hamer in the 2nd District, Mrs. Annie Devine in tho l|th District, and Mrs . Victoria Cray in tho 5th District. The FDP is also supporting the Johnson-Humphrey ticket in tho regular eloction November 3. The FDP candidates (except Mr, Roby) will onter that eloction as Independents. Tho FDP will be the only major group in Mississippi supporting Johnson-Humphrey in Novomber. k. Tho Regular Democratic Party of Mississippi has openly endorsed the Barry Goldwator-William Miller ticket. The FDP is supporting Johnson and Humphrey even though it was Johnson and Humphrey who hlockod the seating of tho FDP at Atlantic City. It is doing this because it recognizes the importance of a Johnson-Humphrey victory in November; and bocause it believes, despite Atlantic City, in the ultimate ability of tho Democratic Party to meet the challenge of tho FDP and eliminate racism from its ranks. It also knows that support for Johnson will help in its fight against tho Regular Democratic Party bocause of tho.latter's opposition to the candidates and Platform of tho National Party. But since 9h5# of Mississippi's Negroes of voting age still are not registered, the FDP can offer only token support for candidates in the regular election. Instead, its efforts will focus on the Freedom Vote, where anyone can vote. The importance of the Freedom Voto is that it gives to Mississippi's disen franchised Negroes tho chance to participate in politics and indicate thoir political preferences. Tho FDP hopes to have more votes cast for its candidates in the Freedom Voto than are cast for the opposition candidates in the regular olection. In this way, tho Freedom Vote will show, not only that Mississippi's Negroes would voto if they were allowed to do so, but that tho outcome of the elections undor such circumstance would be radically different. It would also show that Negroes would be elected to public offices in Mississippi if the Negro half of the state's population wore allowed to vote. The 196Ii Freedom Voto will load to further challenges on the national level. In January tho FDP x^ill attempt to havo the Mis sissippi representatives to Congress unseated on the grounds that they were chosen through a discriminatory voting procedure. The FDP will show through tho Freedom Vote that some at least of the rogular candidates would not h* ve been elected if-Nogroos had the right to voto. If this effort fails, the FDP will ask tho Democratic caucus to strip all Mississinpi representatives of thoir seniority in Conrross. This will also bo done on tho grounds of voting discri mination, and on the rrounds of rogular party disloyaltv, .The FDP expects to emerge from the Freedom Voto with a much strengthened organization at the local level and with much broader awareness of its goals among the Negroes of the state. THE FREEDOM PRIMERS _ The FDP has launched a major now educa tional program in tho 3tato through the use of the Freedom Primers. Tho Freedom Pri->e rs arc short, simple booklets on different phases of politics, economics, and civil rights as thoy effect Mississip pians. The first primer concerned The Convontion Challenge and The Freedom Vote. The primers will bo distributed to MFDP activists and to students in tho Mississippi Project's Froodom Schools. As much as possible, MFDP distribution will bo made through local officers of the party. In this way thoy will servo an organizational as well as an educational function. The primers will bo used as the basis of discussion at precinct and county meetings and at voter registration meetings. It is hoped that the primers can bo published once every 10 days for a full year, each issue on a different topic. It i3 hoped tho prlmors will provide a breadth of facts and concepts more vital to the growth of* political understanding than a more rigid educational program. Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee
6 Raymond Street, N.W 6M-0331 Atlanta 14, Georgia
April 10, 1965
Dear Friends,
On April 2Uth in Washington, D.C, there will be a meeting to plan the final push for support of the Congressional Challenge of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party. I urge all Friends of SNCC to send representatives to the meeting and then to continue to work on lobbying activities in order to unseat the present Congres sional delegation from Mississippi.
In July, the House Committee on Administration will bring their final report on the challenge to the Floor of Congress for final disposition. We can anticipate that there will be a lot of soul searching before the final vote and Congressmen will be asking them selves, "How do my constituents want me to vote?" It's going to be up to us to show them.
The Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party is the one hope for attempts to bring true democracy to the people of this country, especially people who have been for so long denied the least that was theirs— the right to vote. The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee is giving its fullest support to unseating the illegally elected Congressional delegation which now repre:mui'J»a the state of Mississippi.
On behalf of SNCC I urge you to attend this meeting in Washington on the 2b.th.
Yours for Freedom,
John Lewis
JL/mhl
>y One inan, (Jne Vott DF.LFAIATES AT . . MISSISSIPPI FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC PARTY CONVENTION
JACKSON, Miss.
CALL to a CONFERENCE on FREE EEEfTiOSS to be held April 24 '» 19*5 Sponsored bf- MISSISSIPPI FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC PARTY
MISSISSIPPI FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC PARTY 153 U STREET, N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. THE CHALLENGE Over '100,000 Negroes of Mississippi are denied the right to vote by an oppressive system of officiall ysanc- tioned racism. For a century now our Congress has accepted the pretense that the men from Mississippi who ••it among them are representatives of the people. The Challenge of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party asks of this Congress and of the American people, to put an end to the mockery; so say that the people of \1.--issippi are not now represented in the United States Congress and will not be until the alleged representatives are unseated and free and open elections are held. As Representative James Roosevelt said on the opening day of this Congress, "they cannot win 'elections' based on murder and then claim the right to govern free men."
On December 1th. in accordance with a Federal Stat ute which governs procedures for contesting congression al elections, representatives of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party served proper Notice of Challenge on the five Mississippi Congressmen and to the Clerk of the House claiming those congressional elections were illegal by fact of systematic disenfranchisement of Negroes by the we of terror, violence and harrassment.
Oh the opening day of Congress 151 members, only 75 \otes less than a majority voted against a motion to seat the Mississippians who were seated tentatively pending the outcome of the Challenge. Since that time over 125 volunteer lawyers from throughout the Nation went into Mississippi and collected testimony from over 700 witesses including local Negroes. Justice Department Officials, and State and Citizens' Council officials. This impressive body of evidence proves conclusively the almost total disenfranchisement that exists. The Mississippi congressmen have been able to submit no evidence whatsoever to refute this testimony.
In July the House of Representatives must again vote on the fitness of the Mississippians to sit. The Negro people of Mississippi who have risked much in participat ing in this challenge, will be waiting eagerly for the ver dict of the Congress. The evidence of mass terror, eco nomic slavery, and police violence is conclusive. It will be up to us. the American people, through our congressmen to decide whether men elected by fraud and oppression will continue to sit in Congress, or whether the Congress will call upon Mississippi to hold free and democratic elections for those seats. FREE ELECTIONS IN 1965 Place: METROPOLITAN A.M.E. CHURCH 1518 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. Time: 8:30 A.M. Conference Registration PROGRAM MORNING SESSION: REPORT FROM THE SOUTH Mississippi's New Image: Myth and Reality. Reports will be given on evidence gathered by the MFDP for the Challenge, including testimony of former Governor Ross Barnett, Attorney General Joe Patterson, and offi cials of the White Citizen's Council. Discussion of the developments of political activities in Mississippi and throughout the South, and the implications of the Civil Rights Bill in terms of real political democracy. AFTERNOON SESSION: MAKING VOTING LEGISLATION MEANINGFUL How strong will the voting legislation passed in this Congress be? How can we aid in its implementation to ensure that the right to register and to freely exer cise the vote will be a reality in the South. How can we aid the Southern Negro in organizing politically for long-needed social change. How is the effects of the voting legislation and the Challenge relevant in the Northern Ghetto? ORGANIZING FOB THF VOTE AND THE CHALLENGE Discussion groups, on regional basis, to discuss organ izing in the north for FBEE ELECTIONS IN 1965. How do we mobilize and focus the aroused conscience of the nation so that the shock of Selma, Montgomery and Mississippi will be translated into action in their heme communities. EVENING SESSION-. CONGRESSIONAL RKl'ORT The Challenge and Voting Legislation are now before Congress. Those leading the fight will report on ac tivities and developments. SPEAKERS JAMES FARMER. Executive Director, COBE JAMES FORMAN. Executive Secretary, SNCC DR. BOBERT SPIKE. Director. Commission on Race & Religion. National Council of Churches MFDP REPRESENTATIVES LAWRENCE GUYOT MRS. VISTORY GRAY MRS. FANNIE LOU HAMER MRS. ANNIE DEVINE * Partial List THE CALL The Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party issues this Call to the American people of all communities'; the Civil Rights Movement, the Churches, the Unions and to individuals interested in contributing to the effort to bring the secessionist South into the Political Community of America. The Conference is planned to be a meeting of North and South so that interested people from both regions can discuss the implications of the Voting Rights Bifl and the Challenge and what these acts will bring to the politically deprived and powerless people among us. The Conference will provide a forum and an oppor tunity for groups and individuals to join with us in evolving practical and effective programs in communi ties and in the Congress to bring about meaningful participation in the decisions governing their lives by the people presently excluded from this process. Among the programs to be discussed are included national efforts to secure new and democratic elections in the South as soon as the people who have been pre viously barred from participating in those elections are to be registered, and to etisure that newly registered voters are not kept bv violent methods from exercising that right. Ths final national effort to unseat the Mississippi Congressmen, and what this Challenge will mean in terms of bringing truly free and open elections throughout the South will l>e discussed. Together we can learn and do, and in the words of President Lvndon B. Johnson ''We Shall Oven-ome."
Registration Form Return to: MFDP 1353 U Street, .N.W. Washington. D.C.
NAME (Please Print)
ADDRESS
CITY STATE
ORGANIZATION (If Any) THE MISSISSIPPI
FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Background Information lor Supportive Campaigns by Campus Groups
ared by STEVE MAX Political Education Project, Room 309, 119 Fifth Ave., N.Y.C. 10003 Associated with Students for a Democratic Society THE MISSISSIPPI FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC PARTY: BACKGROUND AND RECENT DEVELOPMENTS by STEVE MAX The Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party was founded April 26, 1964 In order to create an opportunity for meaningful political expres sion for the 438,000 adult Negro Mississippians who traditionally have been denied this right. In addition to being a political Instrument, the FDP provides a focus for the coordination of civil rights activity in the state and around the country. Although its members do not necessarily think in these "terms, the MFDP is the organization above all others whose work is most directly forcing a realignment within the Democratic Party. All individuals and organizations who understand that when the Negro Is not free, then all are in chains; who realize that the present system of discrimi nation precludes the abolition of poverty, and who have an interest In the destruction of the Dixiecrat-Republican alliance and the purging of the racists from the Democratic Party are potential allies of the MFDP.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Mississippi Democratic Party runs the state of Mississippi with an iron hand. It controls the legislative, executive and judicial be nches of tne state government. Prior to the November, 1964 elec tion all 49 state Senators and all but one of the 122 Representa tives were Democrats. Mississippi sent four Democrats and one Goldwater Republican to Congress last November. The Mississippi Democratic Party uses its power to exclude Negroes from the electoral process. Though Negroes represent over k0% of the state population, all voter registrars are white. Today only 28,500 Negroes are registered in Mississippi as compared with 500,000 whites. Tnls figure represents only 6.7$ cf the 435,000 Negroes in Mississippi who are of voting age. While the civil rights movement has made some improvement in Negro registration in many Southern states, in Mississippi, registration dropped by several hundred between 1962 and 1964. The methods used to prevent Negro voting are well known and do not need to be gone Into at length. Suffice it to say In the words of Professor Russell H. Barrett of the University of Mississippi: The whole pattern of voting requirements and of the regis tration form Is calculated to make the process appear a hopelessly formidable one. The pattern is supposed to bristle with complexities which culminate in the publica tion of the would-be voter's name in the local newspaper for two weeks. A major purpose of all this is to so over whelm the voter that he will not have the audacity even to attempt registration. (Mississippi Free Press, 4/18/64) -2-
m- ocratlc primary and there has not been a Negro office holder in Miss issippi since 1892 . The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) has documented 140 cases of violence and intimidation in Mississippi from 1961 to February 1964, and has published this material In a pamphlet entitled Mississippi. That figure, however, is representative of a much larger pattern of incidents, mostly unreported. Furthermore, It does not In clude the violence of the 1964 summer months, which at least, equalled that of the three previous years. We cannot, of course, forget . Schwerner, Chaney and Goodman, and must remember that their names are known beaause two of them were white and from the north, and not because they were murdered in Mississippi. Documentation of violence up to the spring of 1963 can be found in the April 4, I963 issue of the Congressional Record. THE ORGANIZATION OF THE MISSISSIPPI FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC PARTY The Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party was officially established at a meeting in Jackson, Mississippi on April 26, 1964. Two hundred to three hundfed delegates attended the meeting and elected a state ex ecutive committee of 12. Because they were barred from the "regular" organization, the Freedom Democrats set up a parallel structure at all levels, including their own system of voter registration. Simplified registration forms and procedures based on those used in several nor thern states were adopted. Over the summer of 1964, the MFDP, working with the Council of Feder ated Organizations (COFO) staff and local volunteers, "registered" over 50,000 Negroes of voting age. MFDP candidates ran and were de feated in the Democratic primary of June 2, 1964. Mrs. Victoria Gray, Mrs. Fannie Lou Hamer, Rev. John Cameron and Mr. James Houston ran in opposition to Senator John Stennls, Rep. Jamie Whitten, Rep. William M. Colmer and Rep. John Bell Williams. Following the primary, these candidates filed the necessary number of signatures to be place on the ballot as independents. This was, however, rejected by the Miss issippi State Board of Election. It was at this point that the MFDP reorganized itself to conduct a mock election and to challenge the credentials of the Mississippi Delegation to the Democratic National Convention. During the weeks of July, 1964, precinct meetings were held in 26 Mississippi counties as alternatives tothe "regular" Democratic precinct meetings which barred Negroes. An estimated 3,500 persons attended these meetings. At the end of July, County Conventions were held in 35 counties as part of the policy of structuring the MFDP In a fashion parallel to that of the "regular" Democrats. Several additional county conventions were held in Jackson, Missis sippi when It was judged that it would be too dangerous for some people to hold meetings in their own counties. A total of 282 dele gates were elected from the county conventions to a state convention which met in Jackson on August 6th. This FDP state convention elected officers, chose a delegation to the Democratic National Convention, and adopted a platform and principles . At that time they stated: "We deem ourselves part and parcel of the National Democratic party and proudly announce our adherence to it. We affirm our belief that the National Democratic Platform of recent years has been a great liberal manifesto dedicated to the best intentions of the people of our Nation of all races, creeds and colors . . .,;
THE CHALLENGE AT THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION The State Convention of the MFDP sent 68 delegates and alternates to the National Convention of the Democratic party to challenge the seating of the "regular1'' Mississippi delegation. The events of the challenge are widely known and since many of you were there or watched the convention on TV, there is no need for a long exposition of the proceedings. Briefly, the MFDP argued against the seating of the regulars on the following grounds: "The traditional Party has demonstrated Its bad faith by: * Excluding Negroes (the group most likely to support President Johnson) from registration and from the Party by harrassment and terror. * Repeatedly proclaiming its independence of the National Party.
• Opposing the platform and principles of the National Party.
* Spewing hatred upon Presidents Kennedy and Johnson.
* Viciously attacking Negroes and Negro organizations. * Enacting laws to keep the National Party off the ballot. * Recessing their state convention so that they can turn to Goldwater. * Coming here (to the Convention - S.M.) only to keep the Fi'eedom Party from being seated. (MFDP brief submitted to cred entials sub-porrmittee of the Democratic National Committee page 61.) -4- The credentials sub-committee of the Democratic National Committee offered as a compromise to seat two leaders of the MFDP delegation, Dr. Aaron Henry and Rev. Ed King, as members-at-large and to establish a committee which would try to have the delegation to the 1968 convention chosen In a non-discriminatory fashion. The compromise was rejected by the MFDP on the grounds that: 1) It was tokenism. 2) The people of Mississippi had chosen 68 representatives and the credentials committee could not simply pick two of them to represent the MFDP. It was felt that to con sent to this would be a violation of the trust that the MFDP convention had placed in its delegates. 3) The "regulars" would still be recognized although the MFDP delegates had come specifically to unseat the "regulars" whom they considered unrepresentative and Illegally chosen by the Mississippi State Convention. 4) The compromise offered no real precedent for the future. 5) The committee which would try to prevent the choosing of an unrepresentative delegation at the 1968 convention was given no real power. 6) The real purpose of the compromise was to prevent a floor fight and was thus an attempt on the part of Johnson-Humphrey et.al. to avoid an open discussion of that which should have been the real issue at the con vention -- racism in the country and In the Democratic Party. The MFDP stated: Finally it must be understood that the FDP delegation did not come to Atlantic City begging for crumbs. They came demanding full rights for themselves and for one million other human beings. They would have accepted any honorable compromise between reasonable men. The test was not whether the FDP could accept "political realism," but rather whether the Convention and the National Democratic Party could accept the challenge presented by the FDP. The Convention and the National Democratic Party failed that test. (undated MFDP maiiing- probably from the end of August, 1064) Prior to the Democratic Convention, resolutions supporting the seating of the MFDP delegation as opposed to the"regulars" were passed by the state Democratic Convention in Michigan, Oregon, -5-
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Colorado. Similar resolutions were passed by the State Committees of New York and California, as well as by the Young Democrat's Club at the University of Virginia.
THE FREEDOM ELECTION
After being ruled off the ballot as an independent party, the MFDP organized a freedom election in which all citizens who met the l4th Amendment criteria for voting were eligible to participate. Ballots were cast in 53 of the state's 82 counties and were mailed ir. from counties too dangerous for the MFDP workers to enter. Needless to say, the application of harrassment, terror and violence was continued by the officials of the state of Mississippi through out the entire process. Thus, the results of the freedom election have the greatest significance.
President Johnson received 63,839 votes in the Freedom Election as opposed to 52.538 votes in the "official" election. Goldwater received 35^,^59 votes in the "official election." The returns from the elections that the FDF contested are as follows:
OFFICE FDP CANDIDATE FDP VOTE NEGROES OVER 21
Rep. 2nd District P'annie Lou Hamer 33,009 159,432 Rep. 4th District Annie Devine 6,001 56,329 Rep. 5th District Victoria Gray 10,138 50,985 U .S . Senator Aaron Henry 6l,004 422,256 OFFICE REGULAR CANDIDATES REG. VOTE WHITES OVER 21 Rep. 2nd District Rep. Whitten 70,201 147,031 Rep. 4th District Rep. Winstead * 28,057 107,509 Rep. 5th District Rep. Colmer 83,120 193,970 U.S. Senator Senator Stennis 343,364 748,266 Arthur Winstead lost to Republican Prentiss Walker, 28,057 to 35,277- Figures I or Negroes and whites over 21 are based on the i960 census. THE FDP CONGRESSIONAL CHALLENGE The Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party is currently carrying its activity a step further by challenging the seating of the entire Mississippi Delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives, and demanding that MFDP candidates be seated In their place. This is being done on the grounds that the November 1964 election in the state was illegal and unconstitutional and therefore void. -6-
THE LEGAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE CHALLENGE: A BRIEF SUMMARY 1. Section 244 of the Mississippi Constitution, which provides for testing an applicant on his understanding of the consti tution, is illegal. In 1954, an amendment to the Constitution of Mississippi was passed by referendum of the voters registered at that time. This amend ment required that applicants be tested on their understanding of the constitution of the state. The form of the test and the evaluation of the test were left to the individual registrar. In 1954, sixty-three percent of the white persons of voting age were already registered to vote. Only five percent of the eligible Negroes were registered. Since registration Is permanent in the state, already enfranchised voters would not have to be retested, and the amendment would thus apply primarily to Negroes. This Is discriminatory. This law therefore violates the Fifteenth Amend ment to the U.S. Constitution, which provides that "the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." Furthermore, the ability of a person to Interpret the constitution is a direct function of his education. Mississippi maintains by statute segregated school facilities which are inferior for Negroes. In addition, there is not a reasonable connection between the capacity to interpret the constitution and the capacity to vote . Constitution, 2. Section 3209.6 of the Mississippi/ which formerly provided that voting application forms remain a permanent public record, was amended in i960 to provide that if an appeal from the decision of the registrar was not made In 30 days, then registrars were not required to preserve any records made in connection with the application of any person to vote. This is Illegal. The Civil Rights Act of i960 provides that all records relating to registration, payment of poll tax and other matters requisite to voting be preserved and open to the Inspection of the Attorney General when such records relate to voting In federal elections. 3. Section 241-A of the Mississippi Constitution, which requires good moral character as a qualification for voting, is illegal.
This section was added to the Constitution of the State in i960 by referendum. Like the provision for the interpretation of the constitution, It was passed by an electorate which was 95^ white and 5^ Negro. Furthermore, the criteria for "good moral character" is undefined. Left entirely to the discretion of the registrar are such questions as: what acts, customs, relationships, ideas, periods of an appli- cants life, what sources of Information, etc., shall be con sidered In judging 'good moral character." 4. The package of voter registration statutes enacted by the 'Mississippi legislature is Illegal. This package provides that: a. Applications be filled out without assistance; that all blanks on the form be properly filled out and that the oath and the application form be signed seperately by the applicant. D« Designation of race to be eliminated on county poll books. c. Good moral character (see above) d. The names and addresses of applicants must be published in a newspaper once a week for two weeks. Within 7 days after the end of the second week, any registered voter may challenge the right of the applicant to be registered. The Registrar shall arrange a hearing and shall pass judgement. Appeal may then be made to the county board of election. If no challenge is made the registrar shall pass on the application within "a reasonable time" to be determined by the registrar. e. In the event that an applicant for registration passes, the registrar shall write the word "passed" on the application, but the applicant is not registered unless he subsequently appears before the registrar and requests to be registered. If the applicant is of good moral character but falls to meet the registration requirements, the registrar shall write the word "failed" on the application, but he shall not state the reason since to do so would be to give assistance to the applicant on future applications. If the applicant meets the requirements but is not of good moral character, the registrar shall state the reasons that the applicant is not of good moral character. This package of legislation has the effect of turning the application form Into a hyper-technical examination in which any Inconsequential error may disqualify a voter. It places unlimited discretionary power in the hands of the registrar while failing to provide any objective criteria on which the registrar is to base his opinion. The publication of the names of applicants leaves them open to harassment and Is a deterrent to applying to vote. These requirements were passed by an all-white legislature but will for already stated reasons be applied primarily to Negroes. 5. Terrorism and violence are part of the symbolic and deliberate disenfranchisement of Negroes in Mississippi. The FDP brief cites 31 cases of the use of violence in Mississippi as a representative example.
6. The purported elections of Rune 2 and N0vemher 3, 1964 arc void 8 These elections violate the 1870 compact between the State of Mississippi and the Congress of the United States readmitting Mississippi to representation in Congress after the Civl War. This act of Congress reads in part as follows: Whereas tte people of Mississippi have framed and adopted a Constitution of State Government which is republican; and whereas the legislature of Mississippi elected under said Constitution has ratified the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amend ments to the Constitution of the United States; and whereas the performance of these several acts in good faith as a condition and precedent to the representation of the state in Congress j therefore: be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the said state of Mississippi is entitled to representation in the Congress of the United States"
**••***-*•*
"And provided further that the State cf Mississippi Is entitled to representation in the Congress of the United States as one of the states of the Union, upon the following funda mental conditions: first, that the constitution of Mississippi shall never be so admitted or changed as to deprive any citizen Or class of citizens of the united States of the right to vote who are entitled to vote by the constitution herein recognized except as a punishment for such crimes as are now felonies at common la#, whereof they shall have been duly convicted under laws equally applicable to all inhabitants of said state: provided that any alteration of said constitution prospective In its effects, may be made in regard to time and place of residence of voters."
******* *
The suffrage provisions of the Mississippi constitution which were never to be amended read as follows: "Section 2: All male inhabitants of this state except idiots and Insane -persons and Indians not taxed, citizens of the United States or naturalized, twenty-one years old or upwards, who have resided in this state six months and In the oounty one month next proceeding the day of election at which said Inhabitant offers.-to vote and who are duly registered according to the requirements of Section 3 of this article, and who are not disqualified by reason of any crime, are declared to be qualified voters."
7. The purported election violates Article One of the Constitution of the United States, which states in Section 2 that ; "the House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states..." The representatives of Miss issippi were clearly not chosen ty the people of Mississippi as only five per cent of the Negro electorate is enfranchlsedd and Negroes compose 40^ of the psp ulation of the state. 8. The purported election violates the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifthteenth Amendments to the Constitution.
On the basis of the above legal argument, the MDFP claims that not only Is the "official" election in Mississippi void and that those elected in it should be disqualified, but that in fact the MFDP election complies with the provisions of the Constit ution of the United States and the compact of I87O and that the candidates of the MFDP should be seated in place of the "Regular Delegation". THE PROCEDURE OF THE CHALLENGE The challenges to the contested Congressmen were filed in accor dance with a formal statute of Congress ...(Title 2, sections 201 to 206, United States Code.) n STEP ONE (December 2-January 3): The challenges have been filed with the contested representatives. The "regular" Democrats have 30 days to reply. STEP TWO (December 2-January 3): On the opening day of Congress, a group of Congressmen challenged the right of the contested delegates to their seats. STEP THREE (January 2-February 10): The Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party has 40 days to-take their testimony In Miss issippi in public hearings. STEP FOUR (February 10-March 20): The challenged Representatives then have 40 days to take their testimony. STEP FIVE (March 20-March 30): The challengers then have 10 days to take rebuttal testimony. The overall evidence is pre sented to the Clerk of the House, and then forwarded to the Public Printer. The briefs are then presented to the Subcomm ittee on Elections and Privileges . STEP SIX (May 1-July l): The challengers then have 30 days to file their briefs; the challenged have 30 days to reply. STEP SEVEN: At this point all the accumulated evidence, briefs, responses,etc ., are handed over to the House Committee on Admin istration which will in all probability hand the case over to the Subcommittee on Elections and Privileges 10
RHAT COULD HAPPEN IN CONQriBSS It Is necessai'y at this point to distinguish between matters such ap the challenge which are sent to a House Committee as a master of statute, those which are refered toil aa' - coir>f{ii^t^commi^te by the House itself Business which comes befcor e f f commi<|tte by virtue of statue is not subject to measure:s j such as the' discharge petition ar the newly enacted 21-day &E15.' I'ti other words, |n the, case of the challenge, the c >rji»ltt6ti is left to its o^n iriitiative or lack thereof. On.: ;ne otpnijr, iand, if in the future, a resolution were to be offerjt l*|n t|# HOuse falling for the unseating of the "regularregi " Mis^ililppijgellgat- ion or calling for the unseating and the seat! ths J MFDP ift its place/R'and were that resolution i-efered' the lomraitt- Ii, it would be subject to the usual measures brlntfng'a bill out of committee, as would a pro forma respJ committee tself > * w iiegarding the Subcommittee on, Elections and Privileges re several possible courses; ! i V ubcommittee could hold hearings; ubcommitt^e could refuse to act a| all possible that action of the full^ eOfhmittfe could the Subcommittee to report, utjfi! 8 n? likely such action would be taken; $ Subcommittee could report favorably] | unf4vorabiy e yfhple committee which would thenl f>tf • U aCP.MPUS P.iOG.RUl TO SUPPO.rT THE CHALLENGE The challenge provides an excellent opportunity for three kinds of programmed activity:
1.) POLITICAL SUPPOAT: Congressmen need to be contacted, written to, pressured, and convinced to support the challenge. The first targets should be those Congressmen who voted to close debate on January 4th, when the question of administering the oath of office to the Mississippi delegation came up on the floor, (see appendix) Special attention should be paid to Congressmen who sit on the House Committee on Administration. Congressmen should be ur^ed to si^n a discharge petition if one is circulated and to uphold the challenge. 2.) Community Support: Students should seek to bring the case of the MFDP before as many community organizations as possible. This includes civil rights groups, PTAS, trades unions, political clubs, church groups,etc. Students can contact these groups and ask to be allowed to address a meetin0, or ask to send a letter out? in the next membership mailing the group has. V'hile there is no precedent for this suggestion, someone might try to arrange a debate with a local of the American Legion or some such group. The experience wjuld be unique, to say the least. Rherever possible, attempt to m,et organizations to pass resolut ions in favor' of the challenge and send these resolutions to youx' local Congressman and to the entire state Congressional delebation. A petition drive would be a useful technique as it enables you to Oo door- to door explaining the MFDP and giving out a fact sheet or- a leaflet. Send the petition to your Congressman and keep a copy for future activity . The MFDP will provide a pe tition for national circulation. Send the results of your drive T to the MFDP office in :ashln0ton and to the SDS office in NYC . Particulax'ly in districts where there is a heavy Ne&ro populat ion, the question of the MFDP should be handled in such a way that it can become an issue in the next election. This is best aiccomplished if it is tied to a local civil rights issue. 3.) CAM PUS EDUCATIOR: Chapters should start at once to make the MFDP challenge an issue on campus. The usual means can be cre atively employed here. The campus press and other publications can be used, as well as a series of timed letters or ax-ticles written to appear once evecy few weeks. If a debate can be started and carried on in the campus press, all the better. Fund-raising events for' the MFDP are necessary and provide an opportunity to publicize the challenge. Where possible, student governments should be ur\,ed to adopt resolutions supporting the MFDP. These should be handled in the same way as resolutions by community groups. There will be calls for- demonstrations and pickets when there is action around the challenge in Congress, and probably sooner if attempts to gather evidence in Mississippi are obstructed, attention should be paid to opining the support of campus Youn0 Democrats, in cases where they worked in the Congressman' campaign and helped him win. Campus religious organisations should be asked to devote part of their services to the MFDP (and part of theii' collections.) This also applies to churches in the community, Rorking on the challenge provides an oppor tunity to go to those students and organizations who in the past have raised the false arguments of legality, these are the people who say, "I would be with you all the way, but how can you condone trespassing, violation of property rights, sit-ins, unlawful assembly, and deliberate breaking of the law." For those who play the legality game, there can be no clearer case of the law being on the side of the MFDP, which hahats care- fully documented the fact that violations of the right 1t o vote are not just the acts of Individuals but are provided fc"o r in the statutes of the state, in violation of the Constitution, the law, and the Compact with the United States.
# APPENDIX
. Reform Democratic Movement, objected to the adminis tration of the oath of office to the Mississippi delegation. As a result, the oath of office was administered to all except the Mississippi delegation. House Leader Carl Albert (Dsr, Okla.) then moved to administer the oath to the Mississ ippi delegation. Mr. Albert yielded for a parliamentary inquiry from Congressman Roosevelt (D., Calif.) who asked the speaker whether the first vote would be on the resolution or on the previous question rpi He was informed that it would be on the previous question if Mr. Albert so moved. Mr. Roosevelt then asked whether if the motion for the previous question were voted down it would be In order to offer an amendment or substitute which would provide that the five representatives elect from Mississippi not be sworn in at that time hut that the matter he referred to the Committee on House Administration. He was told that it would be. Mr. Albert then called the previous question. The significant vote was over the issue of keeping debate open so that an amendment could be made. A "yes" vote on the motion to end debate was a vote against the MFDP and for the Regular Missis sippi delegation. The" motion to end debate carried 276-l4y against the MFDP challenge.
Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party P.O. Box 1329 1353 "R" St. NW Jackson, Miss. 39203 Washington, D.C. 20009 (601) 352-9788 (202) 332-7732
Political Education Project Students for a Democratic Society Room 309 Room 303 119 Fifth Ave 119 Fifth Ave. NYC, 3, New York NYC, 3, New York GR-3-7274 AL-4-2176
New York Ad Hoc Committee for the MFDP 514 W. 126 St. NYC, 27, New York MO-3-1104 THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATION
The House Committee on Administration of the 89th Congree: will consist of the following members:
Democrats Republicans Omar Burleson - Te*. Robert Corbett - Pa. Samuel Friedel - Md, Glenard Lipscomb - Calif. Robert Ashmore - S .C . Charles Chamberlain - Mich Wayne Hays - Ohio Charles Goodell - N.Y. Paul Joans - Mo. Willard Curtin - Pa. George Rhodes - pa. Joe Skubitz - Kan. Watklns Abbltt - Va. Samuel Devine - Ohio Joe Waggonner - La. Carl Perkins - Ky. John Dent - Pa. Sam Gibbons - Fla. Lucien Nedzi - Mich. John Davis - Ga. Kenneth Gray - 111. Augustus Hawkins - Calif Jonathan Bingham - N .Y .
As of this writing sub-committee assignments have not bee issued. In the 88th Congress the sub-committee on Elections and Privileges-consisted of the following:
Democrats Republicans Ashmore - S.C. Chamberlain - Mich Abbitt - Va. Goodell - N.Y Waggonner - La Curtin - Pa. Gibbons - Fla. Devine - Ohio Davis - Ga. Addendum to Pages 2 and 3 of the Appendix of the Political Education Project Paper: "The Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party, Background Information For Supportive Cam paigns by Campus Groups"
1 tf.C, Cramer of Florida voted no. 2 Senner of Arizona did not vote. Elmer Holland of Pennsylvania was absent. 2 The Mississippi delegation, Ottinger of NY, and Toll of Pennsylvania were not yet sworn. 5. Subsequent to the publication of this pamphlet, further changes have been made in the composition of the House Administration Committee. Here "is the final list:
Omar BureIson (D-Texas), Chairman
DEMOCRATS REPUBLICANS S.N. Friedel (Md.) R.J. Corbett (Pa.) R.T. nshmore (S.C.) G.P. Lipscomb (Calif.) W.L. Hays (Ohio) C ,E. Chamberlain (Mich. P.C. Jones (Mo C .E. Goodell (NY" F Thompson, Jr:.l (N.J.) W.S. Curtin (Pa. W.M. Abbitt (Va.) S.L. Devine (Ohio) Joe D. Waggonner, Jr (La.) W.L. Dickinson (Ala.) CD. Perkins (Ky.) J.N. Erlenborn (ill.) J.H. Dent (Pa.) S M. Gibbons (Fla.) L.N. Nedzi (Mich." J. Brademas (Ind J.W. Davis (Ga.)': } K.J. Gray (111.) A .F. Hawkins (Calif ) J.B. Bingham (NY) Black dot indicates those congressmen who voted to 89th Congress, 1st Session January 5, 1965 close debate on the seating of the Miss, congressional HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES For challenge 149 delegation, thus preventing BY STATE AND DISTRICT NUMBER Against 276 a motion to suspend seating from coming to the floor. Democrats — 295 Republicans — 140 Jan.4, 1965
ALABAMA • 7. JAMES A. HALEY LOUISIANA MONTANA / «1. W. Jack Edwards III • 8. D. R. (Billy) MATTHEWS • 1. F. EDWARD HEBERT 1. ARNOLD OLSEN g »2. William L. Dickinson • 9. DON FUQUA • 2. HALE BOGGS • 2. James F. Battin • 3. GEORGE W. ANDREWS •10. SAM M. GIBBONS • 3. EDWIN E. WILLIS g »4. Glenn Andrews • 11. Edward J. Gurney • 4. JOE D. WAGGONNER, JR. • 5. ARMISTEAD I. SELDEN, JR. • 5. OTTO E. PASSMAN NEBRASKA g »6. John H. Buchanan. Jr. 12. William C. Cramer • 6. JAMES H. MORRISON g» 1. CLAIR A. CALLAN g »7. James D. Martin GEORGIA • 7. T. ASHTON THOMPSON • 2. Glenn Cunningham • 8. ROBERT E. JONES • l. G. ELLIOTT HAGAN g .8 SPEEDY O. LONG • 3. David T. Martin g»2. MATSON O'NEAL g »3. Howard H. Callaway ALASKA g »4. JAMES A. MacKAY NEVADA • 5. CHARLES L. WELTNER MAINE • AL WALTER S. BARING AL RALPH J. RIVERS • 6. JOHN J. FLYNT, JR. 1. Stanley R. Tupper • 7. JOHN W. DAVIS g 2. WILLIAM D. HATHAWAY • 8. J. RUSSELL TUTEN NEW HAMPSHIRE ARIZONA •9. PHIL M. LANDRUM g 1. J. OLIVA HUOT • 1. John J. Rhodes •10. ROBERT G. STEPHENS, JR. 2. James C. Cleveland 2. MORRIS K. UDALL MARYLAND 3. GEORGE F. SENNER, JR. AL CARLTON R. SICKLES • 1. Rogers C. B. Morton NEW JERSEY HAWAII 2. CLARENCE D. LONG • AL SPARK M. MATSUNAGA • 3. EDWARD A. GARMATZ 1. William T. Cahill ARKANSAS AL PATSY MINK *4. GEORGE H. FALLON g 2. THOMAS C. McGRATH, JR. • 1. E. C. GATHINGS g»5. HERVEY G. MACHEN g 3. JAMES J. HOWARD • 2. WILBUR D. MILLS 6. Charles McC. Mathias 4. FRANK THOMPSON, JR. • 3. JAMES W. TRIMBLE • 7. SAMUEL N. FRIEDEL * 5. Peter Frelinghuysen, Jr. • 4. OREN HARRIS IDAHO 6. Florence P. Dwyer • 1. COMPTON I. WHITE, JR. • 7. William B. Widnall g *2. George V. Hansen 8. CHARLES S. JOELSON CALIFORNIA MASSACHUSETTS g 9. HENRY HELSTOCKI • 1. Don Clausen 1. Silvio O. Conte 10. PETER W. RODINO, JR. • 2. HAROLD T. JOHNSON ILLINOIS 2. EDWARD P. BOLAND 11. JOSEPH G. MINISH « 3. JOHN E. MOSS 1. WILLIAM L. DAWSON 3. PHILIP J. PHILBIN g 12. PAUL J. KREBS 4. ROBERT L. LEGGETT 2. BARRATT O'HARA 4. HAROLD D. DONOHUE 13. CORNELIUS E. GALLAGHER 3. WILLIAM T. MURPHY 5. F. Bradford Morse 14. DOMINICK V. DANIELS 5. PHILLIP BURTON 15. EDWARD J. PATTEN. JR. 6. William S. Mailliard • 4. Edward J. Derwinski • 6. William H. Bates 7. JEFFERY COHELAN 5. JOHN C. KLUCZYNSKI 7. TORBERT H. MacDONALD 8. GEORGE P. MILLER g 6. DAN RONAN 8. THOMAS P. O'NEILL, JR. g 7. FRANK ANNUNZIO 9. JOHN W. McCORMACK NEW MEXICO 9. W. DONLON EDWARDS • AL THOMAS G. MORRIS • 10. Charles S. Gubser 8. DAN ROSTENKOWSKI • 10. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. • 11. J. Arthur Younger 9. SIDNEY R. YATES 11. JAMES A. BURKE g#AL E. S. (Johnny) WALKER • 12. Bert L. Talcott • 10. Harold R. Collier • 12. Hastings Keith • 13. Charles M. Teague 11. ROMAN C. PUCINSKI NEW 'YOR K 14. John F. Baldwin • 12. Robert McClory 1. OTIS G. PIKE • 15. JOHN J. McFALL • 13. Donald Rumsfeld James R. Grover, Jr. g»14. John N. Erlenborn MICHIGAN • 2. • 16. B. F. SISK g 1. JOHN J. CONYERS, JR. g 3. LESTER L. WOLFF « 17. CECIL R. KING •15. Charlotte Reid 4. John W. Wydler • 16. John B. Anderson g 2. WESTON E. VIVIAN • IS. HARLAN HAGEN g 3. PAUL H. TODD g 5. HERBERT TENZER 19. CHET HOLIFIELD • 17. Leslie C. Arends 6. Seymour Halpern • 18. Robert H. Michel • 4. Edward Hutchinson • 20. H. Allen Smith • 5. Gerald R. Ford, Jr. • 7. JOSEPH P. ADDABBO 21. AUGUSTUS F. (Gusl HAWKINS g 19. GALE SCHISLER 8. BENJAMIN S. ROSENTHAL • 20. Paul Findley • 6. Charles E. Chamberlain 22. JAMES C. CORMAN g 7. JOHN C. MACKIE • 9. JAMES L. DELANEY • 23. Del Clawson •21. KENNETH J. GRAY EMANUEL CELLER • 22. William L. Springer 8. James Harvey •10. • 24. Glenard P. Lipscomb • 9. Robert P. Griffin • 11. EUGENE J. KEOGH • 25. RONALD B. CAMERON 23. GEORGE E. SHIPLEY EDNA F. KELLY 24. MELVIN PRICE • 10. Elford A. Cederberg • 12. 26. JAMES ROOSEVELT g 11. RAYMOND F. CLEVENGER • 13. ABRAHAM J. MULTER i*27. Edwin Reinecke 12. JAMES G. O'HARA • 14. JOHN J. ROONEY 28. Alphonso Bell 13. CHARLES C. DIGGS, JR. • 15. HUGH L. CAREY 29. GEORGE E. BROWN. JR. INDIANA JOHN M. MURPHY 1. RAY J. MADDEN 14. LUCIEN N. NEDZI • 16. 30. EDWARD R. ROYBAL g 15. WILLIAM D. FORD 17. John V. Lindsay • 31. CHARLES H. WILSON • 2. Charles A. Halleck 18. ADAM C. POWELL 3. JOHN BRADEMAS 16. JOHN D. DINGELL • 32 Craig Hosmer 17. MARTHA W. GRIFFITHS 19. LEONARD FARBSTEIN g 33. KENNETH W. DYAL • 4. ¥.. Ross Adair 20. WILLIAM FITTS RYAN • 5. J. EDWARD ROUSH 18. William S. Broomfield • 34. RICHARD T. HANNA g 19. BILLIE S. FARNUM g 21. JAMES H. SCHEUER • 35. James B. Utt • 6. Richard L. Roudebush 22. JACOB H. GILBERT • 36. Bob Wilson • 7. William G. Bray g 23. JONATHAN B. BINGHAM 37. LIONEL VAN DEERLIN 8. WINFIELD K. DENTON 24. Paul A. Fino g«38. JOHN V. TUNNEY g»9. LEE H. HAMILTON MINNESOTA g 25. RICHARD L. OTTINGER •10. Ralph Harvey • 1. Albert H. Quie 26. Ogden R. Reid g 11. ANDREW JACOBS, JR. • 2. Ancher Nelsen g 27. JOHN G. DOW COLORADO • 3. Clark MacGregor g 28. JOSEPH Y. RESNICK 4. JOSEPH E. KARTH 29. LEO W. O'BRIEN 1. BYRON G. ROGERS IOWA Carleton J. King g »2. ROY H McVICKER 5. DONALD M. FRASER • 30. g 1. JOHN R. SCHMIDHAUSER 6. ALEC G. OLSON ,* 31. Robert C. McEwen g 3. FRANK E. EVANS g» 2. JOHN C. CULVER Alexander Pirnle • 4. WAYNE N. ASPINALL • 7. Odin Langen • 32. •3. H. R. Gross 8. JOHN A. BLATNIK • 33. Howard W. Robison g«4. BERT BANDSTRA g 34. JAMES M. HANLEY • 5. NEAL SMITH 35. SAMUEL S. STRATTON CONNECTICUT g 6. STANLEY L. GREIGG 36. Frank J. Horton 1. EMILIO Q. DADDARIO g 7. JOHN R. HANSEN MISSISSIPPI Barber B. Conable, Jr. 2. WILLIAM ST. ONGE 1. THOMAS G. ABERNETHY g 37. Charles E. Goodell , 3. ROBERT N. GIAIMO 2. JAMIE L. WHITTEN • 38. RICHARD D MCCARTHY 4. DONALD J. IRWIN KANSAS 3. JOHN BELL WILLIAMS g 39. Henry P. Smith III g 4. Prentiss Walker g»40. • 5 JOHN S. MONAGAN • 1. Bob Dole 41. THADDEUS J. DULSKI 6. BERNARD P GRABOWSKI g • 2. Chester L. Mize 5. WILLIAM M. COLMER • 3 Robert F Ellsworth • 4. Garner E Shriver NORTH CAROLINA DELAWARE • 5. Joe Skubitz MISSOURI • 1 HERBERT C BONNER AL HARRIS B. McDOWELL. JR 1. FRANK M KARSTEN • 2. L H. FOUNTAIN • 2 Thomas B Curtis • 3. DAVID N HENDERSON KENTUCKY 3. LEONOR KRETZER SULLIVAN • 4. HAROLD D. COOLEY FLORIDA • 1. FRANK A STUBBLEFIELD • 4 WILLIAM J RANDALL • 5 RALPH J. SCOTT • 1 ROBERT L. F. SIKES • 2 WILLIAM H. NATCHER 5. RICHARD BOLLING • 6 HORACE R KORNEGAY • 2 CHARLES E BENNETT g 3. CHARLES P FARNSLEY • 6. W. R. HULL, JR. • 7 ALTON LENNON • 3 CLAUDE PEPPER • 4 FRANK CHELF • 7 Durward G. Hall • 8. Charles Raper Jonas • 4 DANTE B FASCELL » • 5 Tim Lee Carter • 8 RICHARD H. ICHORD • 9 James T. Broyhill •5. A SYDNEY HERLONG. JR •6 JOHN C. WATTS g» 9 WILLIAM L. HUNG ATE • 10 BASIL L WHITENB* •6 PAUL G ROGERS • 7. CARL D PERKINS • 10 PAUL C. JONES • 11. ROY A. TAYLOR
Democrats Are Capitalized — t' = Freshman NORTH DAKOTA PENNSYLVANIA TENNESSEE VIRGINIA • 1. Mark Andrews 1. WILLIAM A. BARRETT • 1. James H. Quillcn 1 THOMAS N DOWNING g»2. ROLLAND REDLIN 2. ROBERT N. C. NIX g • 2. John J. Duncan 2. PORTER HARDY. JR 3. JAMES A. BYRNE • 3. William E Brock III i • 3. DAVID E. SATTERFIFLD III 4. HERMAN TOLL • 4. JOE L. EVINS • 4. WATKINS M. ABBITT OHIO 5. WILLIAM J. GREEN III • 5. RICHARD FULTON • 5 WILLIAM M. TUCK g AL ROBERT E. SWEENEY 6. GEORGE M. RHODES g *6 WILLIAM R. ANDERSON • 6 Richard H. Poff JOHN J. GILLIGAN g» 7. G. Robert Watkins • 7. TOM MURRAY » 7 JOHN O. MARSH. JR g 1. • 8. Willard S. Curtin • 8 ROBERT A. EVERETT • 2. Donald D. Clancy » 8. HOWARD W. SMITH g 3. RODNEY M. LOVE • 9. Paul B. Dague g «9. GEORGE W. GRIDER • 9. W. PAT JENNINGS • 4. William M. McCulloch • 10. Joseph M. McDade I 10. Joel T. Broyhill • 5. Delbert L. Latta 11. DANIEL J. FLOOD • 6. William H. Harsha, Jr. • 12. J. Irving Whalley TEXAS • 7. Clarence J. Brown 13. Richard S. Schweiker WASHINGTON Jackson E. Betts • 14. WILLIAM S MOORHEAD • AL JOE POOL • 8. Thomas L. Ashley 15. FRED B. ROONEY • 1 WRIGHT PATMAN • 1. Thomas M. Pelly 9. WALTER H. MOELLER 16. John C. Kunkel • 2. JACK BROOKS i • 2. LLOYD MEEDS • 10. J. William Stanton • 17. Herman T. Schneebeli • 3. LINDLEY BECKWORTH • 3. JULIA BUTLER HANSEN ,» 11. Samuel L. Devine • 18. Robert J. Corbett • 4. RAY ROBERTS • 4. Catherine May • 12. Charles A. Mosher g 19. N. NEIMAN CRALEY, JR. , « 5. EARLE CABELL . • 5 THOMAS S. FOLEY 13. William H. Ayres 20. ELMER J. HOLLAND • 6. OLIN E. TEAGUE , • 6 FLOYD V. HICKS 14. t 7. JOHN DOWDY . * 7. BROCKMAN ADAMS • 15. ROBERT T. SECREST 21. JOHN H. DENT Frank T. Bow • 22. John P. Saylor • 8. ALBERT THOMAS • 16. John M. Ashbrook • 23. Albert W. Johnson • 9 CLARK W. THOMPSON • 17. WAYNE L. HAYS ,*24. JOSEPH P. VIGORITO .10. J. J. (Jake) PICKLE WEST VIRGINIA • 18. MICHAEL J. KIRWAN • 25. FRANK M. CLARK • 11. W R. POAGE • 1 Arch A. Moore, Jr. • 19. MICHAEL A. FEIGHAN 26. THOMAS E. MORGAN • 12. JAMES C. WRIGHT, JR. • 2 HARLEY O STAGGERS • 20. CHARLES A. VANIK • 27. James G. Fulton • 13. GRAHAM PURCELL • 3. JOHN M. SLACK, JR. 21. Frances P. Bolton • 14. JOHN YOUNG • 4. KEN HECHLER • 22. William E. Minshall g«15. ELIGIO DE LA GARZA g *5. JAMES KEE • 23. RHODE ISLAND ,*16. RICHARD C. WHITE i • 1. FERNAND J. ST. GERMAIN • 17 OMAR BURLESON • 2. JOHN E. FOGARTY •18 WALTER ROGERS WISCONSIN OKLAHOMA • 19 GEORGE H. MAHON , 1. LYNN E. STALBAUM • 1. Page Belcher 20. HENRY B GONZALEZ 2 ROBERT W. KASTENMEIER • 2. ED EDMONDSON SOUTH CAROLINA • 21. O. C. FISHER • 3 Vernon W. Thomson •3. CARL ALBERT • 1. L. MENDEL RIVERS • 22. BOB CASEY • 4. CLEMENT J. ZABLOCKI • 4. TOM STEED • a. ALBERT W. WATSON 5 HENRY S REUSS • 5. JOHN JARMAN • 3. W. J. BRYAN DORN g 6 JOHN A. RACE g» 6. JED JOHNSON, JR. #4. ROBERT T. ASHMORE UTAH • 7. Melvin R. Laird g# 5. THOMAS S. GETTYS • 8 John W. Byrnes • 1. Laurence J. Burton • 9. Glenn R. Davis OREGON 2. DAVID S. KING • 10. Alvin E. OKonski g« 1. Wendell Wyatt • 6. JOHN L. MCMILLAN • 2. AL ULLMAN 3. EDITH GREEN SOUTH DAKOTA VERMONT WYOMING 4. ROBERT B. DUNCAN AL Robert T. Stafford • 1. Ben Reifel g AL TENO RONCALIO • 2. E. Y. Berry UNITED STATES SENATE BY STATE Democrats — 68 Republicans — 32
ALABAMA INDIANA NEBRASKA RHODE ISLAND LISTER HILL BIRCH BAYH Carl T. Curtis JOHN O. PASTORE JOHN J. SPARKMAN VANCE HARTKE Roman L. Hruska CLAIBORNE PELL ALASKA IOWA NEVADA SOUTH CAROLINA E. L. (Bob) BARTLETT Bourke Hickenlooper ALAN BIBLE OLIN D. JOHNSTON ERNEST GRUENING Jack Miller HOWARD W. CANNON Strom Thurmond ARIZONA KANSAS NEW HAMPSHIRE SOUTH DAKOTA CARL HAYDEN Frank Carlson THOMAS J. McINTYRE GEORGE McGOVERN g Paul J. Fannin James B. Pearson Norris Cotton Karl E. Mundt ARKANSAS KENTUCKY NEW JERSEY TENNESSEE J. W. FULBRIGHT John Sherman Cooper HARRISON WILLIAMS. JR. , ROSS BASS JOHN L. McCLELLAN Thruston B. Morton Clifford P. Case ALBERT GORE CALIFORNIA LOUISIANA NEW MEXICO TEXAS Thomas H. Kuchel ALLEN J. ELLENDER CLINTON P ANDERSON RALPH W. YARBOROUGH g George Murphy RUSSELL B. LONG g JOSEPH M. MONTOYA John G. Tower COLORADO MAINE NEW YORK UTAH Gordon Allott EDMUND S. MUSKIE g ROBERT F. KENNEDY FRANK E. MOSS Peter H. Dominick Margaret Chase Smith Jacob K. Javits Wallace F. Bennett CONNECTICUT MARYLAND NORTH CAROLINA VERMONT THOMAS J. DODD DANIEL B. BREWSTER SAM J. ERVIN, JR. George D. Aiken ABRAHAM A. RIBICOFF g JOSEPH D. TYDINGS B. EVERETT JORDAN Winston L. Prouty DELAWARE MASSACHUSETTS NORTH DAKOTA VIRGINIA J Caleb Boggs EDWARD M. KENNEDY QUENTIN N. BURDICK HARRY FLOOD BYRD John J. Williams Leverett Saltonstall Milton R. Young A. WILLIS ROBERTSON FLORIDA MICHIGAN OHIO WASHINGTON SPESSARD L HOLLAND PHILIP A HART FRANK J LAUSCHE HENRY M. JACKSON GEORGE A SMATHERS PAT McNAMARA STEPHEN M. YOUNG WARREN G. MAGNUSON GEORGIA MINNESOTA OKLAHOMA WEST VIRGINIA RICHARD B RUSSELL WALTER MONDALE , FRED R HARRIS ROBERT C. BYRD HERMAN E. TALMADGE EUGENE j. MCCARTHY A. S MIKE MONRONEY JENNINGS RANDOLPH HAWAII MISSISSIPPI OREGON WISCONSIN DANIEL K. INOUYE JAMES O EASTLAND WAYNE MORSE GAYLORD A NELSON Hiram L. Fong JOHN STENNIS MAURINE B. NEUBERGER WILLIAM W PROXMIRE IDAHO MISSOURI PENNSYLVANIA WYOMING FRANK CHURCH EDWARD V. LONG JOSEPH S CLARK GALE W, McGEE Len B. Jordan STUART SYMINGTON Hugh Scott Milward L. Simpson ILLINOIS MONTANA PAUL H DOUGLAS MIKE MANSFIELD Everett McK. Dirksen LEE METCALF
Democrats Are Capitalized — , = Freshman A Petition To The Honorable. House Office Building Washington. D.C.
We believe that the honor of the House of Representatives of the United States and the integrity of our system of government is deeply compromised by the presence of congressmen from the State of Mississippi who are there by virtue of elections that are conducted in blatant and notorious violation of the requirements of the Constitution of the United States of America.
We, therefore, urge you to do all in your power to support the challenge brought by the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party and vote to unseat the Congressional delegation sent to the US. House of Representatives from the State of Mississippi until such time as a delegation elected in free elections, open to all and conducted in accordance with the Constitution, is sent to the Congress from Mississippi.
Name Address
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Prepared by tne Political Education Proiect. 119 5th Avenue, New York 3. N V . associated with Students tor a Democratic Society cejign and printing by Mark J. Scher FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC CLHDS 28 E. JACKSON BLVD. • CHICAGO, ILL. 60604 • PHONE 922-0186
January 9* 1965
Rrs. Lucy Montgomery 875 Bridlewood Northbrook, Illinois
Dear Rrs. Rontgomery:
Re were extreme^ pleased by the report from Milt Cavis that you have consented to remain a guarantor for the benefit performance of "In Rhite America" tc be given ir. early Rarch. Re are very happy to have your support, and that o*" mrs. Benton. Itl.lt Favis and Florence Field are active in FDC as well as CORE, and we consider ourselves most fortunate to have both of them working with us. Dave Levensohn will also be joining our benefit committee. We feel certain that with such splendid assistance, along with the strong endorsement of CCiL.,, we can not fail to have at least as successful aa affair as last year's iro Rusica presentation. Vie are sure the quality of "In Uhite America", as reflected by its reviews, -will help to insure such success.
We understand from members of the Rvanstor FDC, including Dr. iwery Hill, Perry Rir.okur, and Fred Click, that there |is a great deal of interest in FDC in your area. The enclosed .naterials will undoubtedly be of interest to you, and we would like an opportunity at your earliest convenience to further discuss the purposes and program of the FDC. If you know of others who would also like more information about the Freedom Democratic Clubs, we would te pleased to hsve their join us.
Again we thank you, and look forward to your early re.-ronse.
Sincerely, OlLfCfA^A,, Albert Raby, Chainc/r. Freedom Democratic Clrbs op 111"
_,ncs:
Aii/ca FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC CLUBS 28 E. JACKSON BLVD. • CHICAGO, ILL. 60604 • PHONE 922-0186
December 22, I96I4. FOR IMMEDIATE. RELEASE CONTACT: ALBERT RABY, CAROL ACKERMAN
MAYOR DALEY TO MEET WITH PREEDOM DEMOCRATIC CLUBS DELEGATION
The Preedom Democratic Clubs of Illinois will meet with Mayor Daley on Wednesday, December 23rd, at the Sherman Hotel, in the Hollywood Room (105)» at 2:30 P.M., to discuss the challenge currently being filed by the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party, to the seating of Congressmen "elected" from that state on Novem ber 3> 19614-. Tho delegation, led by Albert Raby, Chairman of Preedom Democratic Clubs and Convenor of Coordinator Council of Community Organizations, will ask tho Mayor, in his capacity as a leader of the Democratic Party of Illinois and Mayor of tho city of Chicago, to enlist support for the challcngo among House members from tho state of Illinois.
Tho Freedom Democratic Clubs, a political organization, will re quest the Mayor's support on Rohalf of tho Mississippi Freedom Domocratic Party, which has established an _ad hoc committee in Chicago under the chairmanship of James Bolton. The FDC dele gation will ask the Mayor (1) to speak out publicly in support of the challenge; (2) to urge Illinois Congressmen to co-sponsor -2- a Fairness Resolution currently being planned by a group of House members under the leadership of William Pitta Ryan (D - N.Y.); (3) to encourage the City Council to adopt a supporting rcso- luti on.
Statement enclosed FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC CLUBS 28 E. JACKSON BLVD. • CHICAGO, ILL. 60604 • PHONE 922-0186 HtEEDGfc DS'lOCRATIflaBfcWS WAOKHIT
As you na • recall, we of the Freedom Der..ocratic Clubs of Illinois last met with you in august of tins year to discus.': the seating of the Mississippi
Freedom Democratic 'arty delegates at the Democratic convention in Atlantic
Citv. ToHay again we are here on behalf of the KFDn, this tine with the added support of the many Chicago citizens who :ave joined our or anization, who are deeply concerned about the MFDP cause, and who worked here in Chicago for the election of "'resident Johnson. I lar e nr.Roer of t^ese Chicaoans are natives of Mississippi pud have relatives who live in that state, and who conseouently know first-hand of the mass intimidation of voters in the last election.
Specifically we come to ask 7/our suo ort of the statutory challenge to the seats of the five mississippians who claim to have been elected to the House of
Representatives on November 3rd. The basi3 for this challenge, which has lemal precedent, is the evidence of systematic intimidation of Negroes, in i':ississi-);ji who attempted to exercise their Constitutional privilege to register and vote. VTien over UOO, 000 eligible voters or categorically denied the rit-ht to vote, it is a farce to call the election valid. In addition, these so-calle^ elected Reoresentatives, four of whor ran under the label of the nexocratic uartv, camai~ned activelv '"or the :?eg>ublican candidate for '^resident.
In August we looked to ycu as the leader of ths Illinois delegation to honor the soirit or the Civil Ri: ht3 Lav at Lhe democratic Convention.
Today we look to you as the Mayor of the second largest city in the United states, and as an outstanding leader of the Ter.ocratic Party, to speak out
•gainst the blatant injustices of the election in Rississippi. FREEDOM DEMOCRATIC CLUBS s.a
We of tv e T^reeHom Democratic mlubs cf Illinois look to you to speak
out publicly in support of the MFDP challenge, thereby indicating your
awareness of the legal and moral validitv of th*?t challenge. We ask you
to show by such support that you reject elections which are conducted in violation of the very principles of free election by which you ycmrself
were elected. It is not at all difficult to find evidence of intimidation
surrounding the Mississippi election. The FBI investigation fully documents
the incredible record of violence: harassment, economic reprisals, ,.•**•
physical abuse, ever <.utriRnt murder. v"e are confident you will wish to
explain to your citizenry in no uncertain terms the legal and moral
justifications for the challenge. In asking you. to bring this issue to
the oeople of Chicago, we fuel we are assisting in building the commitment
of the Democratic Fartv to fight for the rights of all citizens—and in
thia case, specifically for those citizens who are denier' even the right
to fi -ht for themselves.
Me isk vou furthermore to consult with the recently elected Congressmen
from Illinois, an<-> to request their support for the challenge. Congressman
William Fitts Ryan of New Yor'*- is holding a ore-ss conference today to
report on plans of several members of the House of Representatives to
object to the administration of the oath to the "Congrescmen-elect" from
Mississippi on January Uth, 196^>, and to draft a Fairness Resolution
Concerning the mississippi delegation. We feel that you, as a leader in
the Democratic Party structure in Illinois, can be an extremely significant
voice in seeing to it thr.t the Illinois representatives fight for this
issue.
We hcve asked our Con ressmen tm support the challenge in the followin; specific ways:
1. To wurrc with Congressman Ryan and others to co-author a Fairness
Resolution reading aa fellows: "Be it resolved that pending the final -3- decision of the H
