Regional Oral History Off ice University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley , California

Government History Documentation Proj ect Ronald Reagan Gubernatorial Era

CITIZEN ADVOCACY ORGANIZATIONS, 1960-1975

Virna M. Canson Waging the War on Poverty and Discrimination in California through the NAACP, 1953-1974

Margar ete Connolly Speaking Out for Retarded Citizens

Carolyn Cooper Heine Building a Basis for Change: California's Commission on the Status of Women

Anita M. Miller "The Tide of the Times Was With Us": Women's Issues and the California Commission on the Status of Women

Interviews Conducted by Sarah Sharp and Julie Shearer in 1984

Copyright @ 1987 by the Regents of the University of California This manuscript is made available for research purposes. No part of the manuscript may be quoted for publication without the written permission of the Director of The Bancroft Library of the University of California at Berkeley.

Requests for permission to quote for publication should be addressed to the Regional Oral History Office, 48 6 Library, and should include identification of the specific passages to be quoted, anticipated use of the passages, and identification of the user.

It is recommended that this oral history be cited as follows:

To cite the volume: Citizen Advocacy Organ- izations, 1960-1975, an oral history conducted in 1984, Regional Oral History Offlce, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, 1987.

To cite individual interview: Margaret e Connolly , "Speaking Out for Retarded Citizens," an oral history conducted in 1984 by Julie Shearer, in Citizen Advocacy

Oreanizations.u 1960-197 5. Reeionalu Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California , Berkeley, 1987.

Copy No. PREFACE

California government and politics from 1966 through 1974 are the focus of the Reagan Gubernatorial Era Series of the state Government History Documenta- tion Project, conducted by the Regional Oral History Office of The Bancroft Library with the participation of the oral history programs at the Davis and Los Angeles campuses of the University of California, Claremont Graduate School, and California State University at Fullerton. This series of interviews carries forward studies of significant issues and processes in public administration begun by the Regional Oral History Office in 1969. In previous series, inter- views with over 220 legislators, elected and appointed officials, and others active in public life during the governorships of Earl Warren, Goodwin Knight, and Edmund Brown, Sr., were completed and are now available to scholars. The first unit in the Government History Documentation Project, the Earl Warren Series, produced interviews with Warren himself and others centered on key developments in politics and government administration at the state and county level, innovations in criminal justice, public health, and social welfare from 1925-1953. Interviews in the Knight-Brown Eracontinuedthe earlier inquiries into the nature of the governor's office and its relations with executive departments and the legislature, andexploredthe rapid social and economic changes in the years 1953-1966, as well as preserving Brown's own account of his extensive political career. Among the issues documented were the rise and fall of the Democratic party; establishment of the California Water Plan; election law changes, reapportionment and new political techniques; education and various social programs.

During Ronald Reagan's years as governor, important changes became evident in California government and politics. His administration marked an end to the progressive period which had provided the determining outlines of government organization and political strategy since 1910 and the beginning of a period of limits in state policy and programs, the extent of which is not yet clear. Interviews in this series deal with the efforts of the administration to increase government efficiency and economy and with organizational innovations designed to expand the management capability of the governor's office, as well as critical aspects of state health, education, welfare, conservation, and criminal justice programs. Legislative and executive department narrators provide their perspec- tives on these efforts and their impact on the continuing process of legislative and elective politics.

Work began on the Reagan Gubernatorial Era Series in 1979. Planning and research for this phase of the project were augmented by participation of other oral history programs with experience in public affairs. Additional advisors were selected to provide relevant background for identifying persons to be interviewed and understanding of issues to be documented. Project research files, developed by the Regional Oral History Office staff to provide a systematic background for questions, were updated to add personal, topical, and chronological data for the Reagan period to the existing base of information for 1925 through 1966, and to supplement research by participating programs as needed. Valuable, continuing assistance in preparing for interviews was provided by the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, which houses the Ronald Reagan Papers, and by the State Archives in Sacramento. An effort was made to select a range of interviewees that would reflect the increase in government responsibilities and that would represent diverse points of view. In general, participating programs were contracted to conduct interviews on topics with which they have particular expertise, with persons presently located nearby. Each interview is identified as to the o;iginating institution. Most interviewees have been queried on a limited number of topics with which they were personally connected; a few narrators with unusual breadth of experience have been asked to discuss a multiplicity of subjects. When possible, the interviews have traced the course of specific issues leading up to and resulting from events during the Reagan administration in order to develop a sense of the continuity and interrelationships that are a significant aspect of the government process.

Throughout Reagan's years as governor, there was considerable interest and speculation concerning his potential for the presidency; by the time interview- ing for this project began in late 1980, he was indeed president. Project interviewers have attempted, where appropriate, to retrieve recollections of that contemporary concern as it operated in the governor's office. The intent of the present interviews, however, is to document the course of California government from 1967 to 1974, and Reagan's impact on it. While many interview- ees frame their narratives of the Sacramento years in relation to goals and performance of Reagan's national administration, their comments often clarify aspects of the gubernatorial period that were not clear at the time. Like other historical documentation, these oral histories do not in themselves provide the complete record of the past. It is hoped that they offer firsthand experience of passions and personalities that have influenced significant events past and present.

The Reagan Gubernatorial Era Series was begun with funding from the California legislature via the office of the Secretary of State and continued through the generosity of various individual donors. Several memoirs have been funded in part by the California Women in Politics Project under a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities, including a matching grant from the Rockefeller Foundation; by the Sierra Club Project zlso under a NEH grant; and by the privately funded Bay Area State and Regional Planning Project. This joint funding has enabled staff working with narrators and topics related to several projects to expand the scope and thoroughness of each individual interview involved by careful coordination of their work.

The Regional Oral History Office was established to tape record autobio- graphical interviews with persons significant in the history of California and the West. The Office is under the administrative direction of James D. Hart, Director of the Bancroft Library, and Willa Baum, head of the Office. Copies of all interviews in the series are available for research use in The Bancroft Library, UCLA Department of Special Collections, and the State Archives in Sacramento. Selected interviews are also available at other' manuscript depositories.

July 1982 Gabrielle Morris Regional Oral History Office Project Director 486 The Bancroft Library University of California at Berkeley REAGAN GUBERNATORIAL ERA PROJECT

Advisory Council

Eugene Bardach James W. Leiby Charles Benson Edwin Meese 111 Nicole Biggart Sheldon L. Messinger John Burns James R. Mills Lou Cannon William K. Muir Bert Coffey Charles Palm Edmund Constant ini A. Alan Post Lawrence deGraaf Albert S. Rodda Enid Douglass Ed Salzman Harold E. Geiogue Paul Seabury James Gregory Alex Sherriffs Ronald Grele Michael E. Smith Gary Hamilton A. Rur ic Todd Hary Ellen Leary Molly Sturges Tuthill Eugene C. Lee Raymond Wolfinger

Interviewers

Malca Chall A, I. Dickman* Enid Douglass Steve Edgington Harvey Grodg Ann Lage Gabrielle Morris Sarah Sharp Julie Shearer Stephen Stern Mitch Tuchman

*Deceased during the term of the project On behalf of future scholars, the Regional Oral History Office wishes to thank those who have responded to the Office's request for funds to continue documentation of Ronald Reagan's years as governor of California. Donors to the project are listed below.

Anonyrnou s

Margaret Brock

Monroe Brown

Edward W. Carter

Sherman Chickering

Aylett B. Cotton

Justin Dart*

William C. Edwards

James M. Hall

William Randolph Hears t

William Hewlett

Jacquelin Hume

Earle Jorgensen

L. W. Lane, Jr.

Gordon C. Luce

Norman B. Livermore, Jr.

Joseph A. and Gladys G. Moore

David Packard

Robert 0. Reynolds

Henry and Grace Salvatori

Porter Sesnon

Dean A. Wa tkins Regional Oral History Office University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California

Government History Documentation Project Ronald Reagan Gubernatorial Era

Virna M. Canson

WAGING THE WAR ON POVERTY AND DISCRIMINATION IN CALIFORNIA THROUGH THE NAACP, 1953-1974

An Interview Conducted by Sarah Sharp in 1984

Copyright @ 1987 by the Regents of the University of California

TABLE OF CONTENTS -- Virna H. Canson

INTERVIEW HISTORY i

BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION 5 ii

I THE NAACP's INFORMAL ADVISORY GROUP WITH ALEX SHERRIFFS, 1973 1

I1 FAMILY AND EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND 5

111 WORKING WITH THE NAACP AND THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, 1953-1967 12 Early Volunteer Work with the NAACP Credit Union in Sacramento, 1953-1965 12 State Office of Economic Opportunity, 1965-1967; Neighborhood Action Program 21

IV FIELD DIRECTOR AND LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE, WEST COAST REGION, NAACP, 1967-1974 27 California Committee for Fair Practices; Fight to Save the Rumford Act; Vocational Education Advisory Council Appointment 2 7 Helen Nelson and the Undoing of Her Work; The Watts Riots as a Consumer Revolt 34 Two Sides of the Same Issue: Affirmative Action and Desegregation in California 4 5

TAPE GUIDE

INDEX

INTERVIEW HISTORY

Among the oldest and most respected citizen advocacy groups in America is the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. In the following interview, Virna Canson, western regional director of the NAACP, comments on the organization's activities during the administration of Governor Ronald Reagan and on her own earlier career as an NAACP volunteer and as staff member for the California Office of Economic Opportunity.

As Virna Dobson, she studied at Tuskegee Institute, met Clarence Canson, and came as his bride to Sacramento, which she describes as something of a culture shock after growing up in the larger, more prosperous black community in Oklahoma. While a young housewife in the 19409, Mrs. Canson became active in advising youth and in helping encourage major companies in the Sacramento area to hire black workers. This led to her involvement with expansion of the NAACP credit union program, where she became an articulate spokesperson for improved consumer education and was appointed by Governor Edmund G. Brown, Sr., to the advisory committee of the state's first consumer counsel.

Mrs. Canson recalls that consumer education was also an important part of her work for the state Office of Economic Opportunity during the early years of the War on Poverty. Information and referral were vital to the emergency interagency service she helped to set up in the Watts area of Los Angeles when that community erupted in a riot in 1965.

When Governor Reagan came into office, there were plans to continue the multiservice center concept pioneered in Watts, and Mrs. Canson was approached about staying with the OEO. She was clear, however, that Reagan had targetted the consumer program to be destroyed, and so she resigned to re turn to the NAACP.

In describing her work as western regional director, Mrs. Canson makes vivid again the conflicting convictions that swirled around the Rumford Fair Housing Act, consumer counsel, and Office of Economic Opportunity in the 1960s and 1970s. In addition, she reports her successful efforts to maintain communication with the governor's office in the midst of the strong emotions of those years.

Dr. Sarah Sharp conducted the interview in December 1984 in the NAACP regional office in San Francisco. Mrs. Canson responded with interest to the questions on the outline, which had been sent to her in advance. She provided additional information in response to queries sent to her with the edited transcript of the interview, as noted in the final text. Readers interested in further information about the California Office of Economic Opportunity may wish to consult interviews with Lawrence Chickering and Robert Hawkins in this series; and about public health services in Watts in interviews with Lester Breslow.

Gabrielle Morris Project Director

October 1986 Regional Oral History Office 486 The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley iii

PbATlQNAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE _*.-...,.-.-..---.I-...--: -.-.-....-.-..- ...... --. -- .- B:asrse Direct Reply To: Wmr Cmwnr Dlroctor, REGION 1, NMCP 1975 Sutter Sinel, Sulte #I, San Frmclrco, CA - (415) 931-3243

RESUME MRS. VIRNA M. CANSON

Mrs. Virna M. Canson is Director of the West Coast Region, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. She assumed this position, August 1, 1974, following the death of Mr. Leonard H. Carter, Regional Director. Mrs. Canson joined the staff of NAACP in July 1969 as a Field Director and Legislative Advocate. From April 1965 to February 1967, Mrs. Canson served as Credit Union and.Consumer Education Specialist with the California State Office of Economic Opportunity. In August 1965, iminediately after the Los Angeles riots, Flrs. Canson was assigned to work in the Watts Area. She partici- pated in the planning and operation of the State's first experimental Service Center Program. This pilot program led to the establishment of other.state service centers to serve the poverty areas throughout California. She spearheaded.the drive to organize credit unions among lowlncome families; she worked with community action committee staffs,throughout the State of California to crcatc interest and awareness of the plight of the low income consumer and assisted in program development and proposal writing in several communities. With the assistance of the California Credit Union League, operating under a small contract the Statc Offi-ce of Economic Opportunity, twenty-eight credit unions were organized in 1ow.income-areasin Los Angeles, Alameda, San Francisco, San haquin, Kern, Ventura, Riverside, Contra Costa and Tulare Counties. From 1953 t6 1965 Mrs. Canson served as Treasurer-Manager of the Sacramento Branch NAACP Credit Union. Asscts of the credit union grew from $35,000 to $400,000 under her leadership. A proposal she authored and subr~~ittedfrom the Sacrmento Branch NAACP Credit Union was funded as a component of the Community Action Program of Sacramento County. The proposal, entitled, LIFE (Low Income Family Economics), provided for Money Management, Counseling, Consumer Education, Buying Club organization among the low income families of Sacramento County. It was the first such proposal funded under Title 11-A of the Economic Opportunities Act of 1964.

1 186 REMSEN STREET BROOKLYN, NEW YORK 1 1201 : 421 2) 858-0C: 3. RJXBE OF MRS. VIRNA M. CANSON PAGE 2

PUBLICATIONS

"The NAACP and the Credit Union", CRISIS Magazine, Spring 1955 "Hunt for a Home", THE PROGRESSIVE, April 1954 "NAACP Credit Unions", BRIDGE Magazine, March 1963 "Consumer Education, Money Management Counseling the the War on Foverty" (unpublished - Distributed through State OEO), 1965 "The Low Income Consumer, Will He Win or Lose" (unpublished- Distributed through State OEO) "Dollars and Sense", SACRAMENTO OBSERVER column, 1960-1962 Legislative Advocate's Report - Publication through the NAACP Legislative Office. Annual Voting Records of California Legislators - Publication through the NAACP Legislative Office "The Immoral Dimension of the Bakke Case" "Strategies of Mr. Bakke's Allies", SACRAMENTO OBDERVER, 1978 "Will the Real NAACP Please Stand Up" (Background for NAACP publication), 1981

PRESENT MEMBERSHI'PS People to People, Sacramento chap& Oak Park United Church of Christ National A3sociation for the Advancement of Colored People Subscribing Golden Heritage Life Member Founders Club, Credit Union National Association National Council of Negro Women - Life Member Women's Civic Improvement Club, Sacramento PAST MEMBERSHIPS National'Advisory Committee, Student Executive Intern Program Equal Education Opportunities Commisison, State of California, Appointee of the California State Senate College Policy Advisory Committee to U.C. - Davis, College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences Governor's Task Force on Civil Rights (appointed by Governor Jerry Brown) President's Advisory Board, San Francisco State University PAGE 3

PAST MEMBERSHIPS (con' t)

National Review Committee, Consumer Education Materials Project, Consumers Union Sacramento County Health Advisory Committee Director, California Credit Union League Sacramento Valley Chapter, California Credit Union League, Past Chairman Citizens Blue Ribbon Committee on School Finance, Sacramento Unified School District Urban Coalition of Greater Sacramento, Charter Membcr and Secretary Advisory Board, California Vocational and Technical Education Fair Employment Practices Commission, Women's Advisory Committee Sacramento County Welfare Department, Citizens Advisory Committee to the Department's Job Development and Placement Unit Sacramento County Redevelopment Agency, Citizens Advisory Committee Sacramento Council of Churches First Consumer Action Conference sponsored by the Office of Economic Opportunity and the President's Committee on Consumer Interests, Panelist, August 1965, Washington, D.C. Sacramento Unified School District, Advisory Committee on Family Life Education Domestic Relations Court of Sacramento County, Advisory Board Advisory Committee to the California Consumer Counsel White House Conference to Fulfill These Rights, Conferee U.S. Civil Rights Commission, Conference on Race and Education, . Conference Co-Chairman White House Conference on Food and Nutrition, Confcrcc

AWARDS AND C,ITATIONS [Partial) Honoree, Public Advocates, Inc. Third Annual, National Public Service Award, Sojouner Truth Award First winner of the D. D. Mattocks Award given by the Sacramento Branch NAACP for distinguished community service IotaPhi Lambda Sorority Business Week Award - "Woman of the Year" 1957, 1962 Who's Who of American Women, 1968-1969 Editions National Asso'ciation for the Advancement of Colored People, Southern Area Conference, Outstanding Seryic.~ Sacramento Branch NAACP Youth Council .1954, 1974 Who's Who Among Black Americans National Council of Negro Women, Outstanding Service Black Police Officers fissociation, Los Angeles, Service Award El Cerrito Branch NAACP California Creditunion League, Credit Union Organization City of Long Beach Operation Second Chance, San Bernardino, CA RESUME OF MRS. VIRNA M. CANSOP! PAGE 4

Mrs. Canson isSa native of Oklahoma, born in Bridgepor+,.Oklahoma. Daughter of the late William A. and Eula Gross Dobson, Mrs. Canson has resided In Sacramento, California since her marraige, August 7, 1940. She g~aduatedfrom Donglass Hlgh School, Wewoka, OK; received college training at Tuskegee Institute, Alabama (1938-1940); graduated from the Credit Unlon National Association School for Credit"Union Personnel, Universlty of Wisconsin, Madison. She is married to Attorney Clarence B. Canson, retired Attorney- Advisor, San Brancisco District Office, Small Business Administration; mother of Dr. Clarence B. Canson of San Francisco and Ms. Faythe Canson 4kSS of -4, *l;C- CLAM ****

September 1984 CANSON, FAM, suoeiation executive; b. Bridgeport, OK, June 10,1921; Tuskeget Inst; GdCredit Union Nat h.Sth for Credit, U. of WI; rn. Clarence B; children--Clarence B. Jr, Euh Faythe. Reg. Dir, Wcst Coast Region I, NAA-CP., 197- Field Dir, & kg. Advocate, Wat Coast Region I, N-ASLCP., 1967-74; Credit Union 8 Consumer Edn. Spec, CA State Office of Econ Oppor, 1965-67; Tresr-Mgr, NAACP. Credit Union, Sacramento Br, 195%. Mem, Pres., Sacramento Valley Chpt, CA Union League; Mem. Bd Dir., Sacramento Br. NAACP.-Credit Union; Mem., Founden Club, Credit Union Nat. Auq past mea of var. professional activita. Mem, CA Adv. Council, Vocational & Tech Edn.; EE0.e CA State U. AlKbta;'Adv. Comm, Sickle 011:Anemia; Sacra- mento 6.Health Adv. Corn; Racial Justice Task Forc, No. CA Cod., United Ch. of Christ; People to People; Life ma,N.kkCP; Nat. Council of Negro Women;.mem. var. other civic senices past & ptesent. 1st Wmer of D. D. Mattocks Award for service to comm., Sacramento Br. N.A.A.C.F; Bru. Week Award, Iou Phi Lamha, 1'957 k 1962; Who's Who of Am. Women, 1968-69; Outstanding Svc Award, So. Area Cod, S.A.A.CP. Office: Flood Bldg 870 Market St Room 378 San Francisco CA 94102 . .

From Who's Who Among Black Americans, 1980-1981 Northbrook, Ill., Who's Who...

I THE NAACP's INFORMAL ADVISORY GROUP WITH ALEX SHERRIFFS, 1973 [Interview 1: December 18, 19841///I

Sharp: Your interview will be bound in with other interviews on similar topics, as part of the Reagan series.

Canson: What usually happens with these?

Sharp: It's primarily researchers who use them. The history of the NAACP is very fragmented. Each of our interviews appeals not only to people interested in California state politics and political history, but also more specialized kinds of research, like the history of the NAACP. The way I have arranged the topics and organized them is meant to illuminate certain parts of the NAACP's history, and in this particular period, in Ronald Reagan's administration.

Canson: That's the history in the West, or the history nationally?

Sharp: The history in the West. There probably will be a presidential oral history project, as there has been since the [John F.] Kennedy administration. Whatever we don't get, that larger project will pick up. And yet, coming back to the state focus and the state period is really essential. So we think that they will be of quite a bit of interest .

The interviews on that list that are completed already are going to different libraries and manuscript depositories around the country.

##This symbol indicates that a tape or a segment of a tape has begun or ended. For a guide to the tapes see page 53. Canson: I see Alex* on here. I knew him very well. As a matter of fact, we exchange Christmas cards every year. Well, when we get to that part, I'll tell you about it, but for about a year, we met once a month around various places.

Sharp: Was that the same group that Mrs. Hampton*" was in?

Canson: Claudia--yes. As a matter of fact, her appointment grew out of that group.

Sharp: That's right. I had an interview with her in the summer. She's great.

Canson: Isn't she something?

Sharp: A real dynamic lady.

Canson: Oh, yes. Alex called me and said he--that was near the last year of ~eagan'sadministration.

[interruption]

Sharp: But you had met with that group pretty often?

Canson: As a matter of fact, I kind of was the shepherd of it, and initiated it with Alex late in 1973. We met once, twice, kind of in a larger group, and then it shifted down to Grandvel Jackson, Claudia, Ruth Barr, and some others. (I've got some notes here that might help me to remember. )

We would talk about various issues. I just got the sense that Alex felt good about the experience. We had a party for Alex at my house. My husband cooked the steaks and stuff. We just had a great time. There was a later party which Claudia and Ruth gave. We exchanged Christmas cards just about every year.

It was very interesting. There is a science to that-- concurrent with that, [John] Vasconcellos was working and doing some things with Alex, because of his deep interest in education. I got

*Alex Sherriffs, d ducat ion Advisor to Ronald Reagan and State University Administrator, 1969-1982," an oral history interview conducted 1981-1982, The Governor's Office and Public Information, Education, and Planning, 1967-1974, Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California at Berkeley, 1984. **Interview with Dr. Claudia H. Hampton fn process in this same Reagan Era series. Canson: the distinct feeling that there was a little sensitivity on Vasconcellos's part. I guess he didn't quite see how we could be having that sort of dialogue with Alex in that administration.

He never articulated this to me. I just got it from other people, that he didn't see why this group had to be meeting when he could essentially take care of these kinds of problems, and that he should be the conduit. Those were not the words, but that was the feeling that was conveyed.

Sharp: Why was the group meeting?

Canson: We were meeting to explore a lot of different issues in education. I really think it boiled down to something that was rather partial for Alex, in that he was, I guess, hearing and being personally involved in dialogue which was so different from the kind of stuff that was going on at the [state] capitol level.

He really would need to describe what it meant to him. He had a lot of ideas that were working through his ideas. [The editor asked the interviewee to clarify her statement and she wrote the following comments during her review of the transcript.] Our backgrounds and day to day experiences were quite different from Alex. For example, Alex was quite enamored with a book by Thomas Sawell who is a black ultra conservative now at Hoover Institution at Stanford. Alex bought the book in quantity and distributed it widely among legislators, State Board of Education members and others. We thought the book was bad.

[transcript resumes] I also have the sense that Alex was made the victim in the free speech thing [the Free Speech Movement at University of California, Berkeley]. He got ground to a pulp on that one, and perhaps had some bitterness. This group certainly was not in touch with the free speech business as such.

What we were trying to convey were some dimensions in education. I don't know that we could have ever convinced Alex to go out and be a rabid advocate for busing, but so much gets missed in terms of why is the NAACP always out there pushing for integrated education.

I would say that a number of the people who are rabid anti-busing people would never believe that children in South Los Angeles today study out of books from West Los Angeles--hand-me-downs. With as much money as we're spending for education, people would never understand. Or that there are schools with no cafeterias. Canson: All of these various components--you know, poorest prepared teachers, and all these other kind of things--are going on in these schools, as the boards represent that they are in fact proponents of equal educational opportunity. It's so intricate, and there is so much emotion, that nobody ever understands that.

I just cite that as an example of the kinds of discussions we had. If you've got time to talk all day, you walk through these things. Even though you disagree, you say, "But here they are. Here's the flaw in this, and here's that ." I think included in here may be some notes from some of those meetings.

Sharp: I'd like to see those.

I would like to go back and start at the beginning, to get some biographical information about you. Then we'll come up to some of these larger topics. It was good to start off with just a brief anecdote about those meetings with Sherriffs. They are so interesting, and I didn't know anything about them until Dr. Hampton mentioned them to me. She mentioned, of course, your name, and some of the other people. It was hard for me to understand why it would happen and what was the point of it was, and what the effect of those meetings was. I1 FAMILY AND EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

Canson: I grew up in a home where I would get a spanking if I didn't look at people. My mother or my father could not abide with your not having eye contact.

That's all the way back to childhood. That's a good way to start.

Sharp: Maybe you could tell me a little about some of the early influences in your life that now are still part of why you are doing what you are doing.

Canson: Well, oh boy, I'll have to go all the way back I suppose. First, my parents were teachers. My mother and father both taught school. My father was born in Arkansas, and my mother was born in North Carolina. I really can't say how he got to Oklahoma, which is my native home, but my mother's father came from North Carolina to Oklahoma in search of properties and new life.

He settled in a little place called Earlsboro, Oklahoma, which is in Seminole County. Seminole County is a rich oil county. We always managed to not get included in that. There were some tales that said that the companies generally, even if they found oil, they would cap it if the land were owned by blacks. (I cannot document this.)

Oklahoma is an interesting state in that, at one point, there was consideration of making it an all-black state. There was a lot of migration to Oklahoma from various states. This was--I guess that they must have come in the early 1900s, I'm not sure. It might be even earlier than that.

My mother [Eula Gross Dobson] was the oldest of three children. She had a sister who never really did much work of any kind, because Grandpa had the farm, and my grandmother was a very mothering kind of Canson: person, and had a little brood, you know. And then a younger brother. Her father really looked upon her as his son, and exposed her to a lot of different kinds of things, which forced her into a leadership role.

My father [William A. Dobson] was the scholarly kind. His father, my grandfather, was a minister, who was kind of like a circuit-riding minister. He was a Congregationalist, way back in those days. We have some historical material, very little, but some. And I have some of his books from his library. He pastored a church in a little town called Anadarko, which .is in Cato County, in Oklahoma.

My father had two half brothers, and a full brother. The brother, Richard Dobson, became a doctor, and practiced in Sioux City, Iowa, for a number of years, and was very successful. His son, Richard Dobson, Jr., was a pediatrician in New York for a number of years. He died relatively young, in his mid-50s. His full brother, Dr. Andrew Dobson, lived in Illinois. He had another brother, Isaac Dobson, who lived in Toledo, Ohio. My father was an educator. He attended private schools in Oklahoma; graduated from Langston University in Langston, Oklahoma.

Sharp: All these doctors!

Canson: My father brought that influence there, with his father being a very strong person, and a minister. My mother's father being committed to the land and ownership, and business, and that kind of thing. Those two influences were present in our lives.

I have one brother, who is an attorney, William Dobson. He lives in San Jose. He practices law in San Jose. I vaguely recall when my father was teaching school in a town outside of Tulsa, Oklahoma, called Sapulpa. I must have been maybe two, maybe a little older. I recall the debate in the home about whether or not my mother would go to Seminole County, because of the Tulsa riots. A major race riot took place in Tulsa.

That discussion, I just vaguely remember it. Somehow it sticks with me. But she determined that she wanted to stay there with her husband. I can't even remember what happened, but I do recall that. That kind of ties me way back there into that era of the riot period.

Mom belonged to organizations. She was more business oriented than my father. I guess that was coming from her father, and he was more the scholarly type. They were always persons who were committed to public service. They taught in the Sunday school, and they were very well respected as teachers. Canson: My father became president of the Oklahoma Association of Colored Teachers. (At that time they were called "colored" teachers.) He held that position, which then put us in the circle, primarily, of educators. Even though we lived in the little house--they used to provide houses for the teachers called teacherages. None of them were really well-paid. They had to constantly live beyond their means, and do what was expected of them, but they managed somehow.

He was principal of the school in Lima, Oklahoma. He was principal of the school there, and my mother taught home economics. We were constantly exposed to people who were contributing, and people who had a very high sense of values and assumed the responsibilities of leadership.

My mother was a very high-spirited woman. I'll never forget one day when she was outside, washing, and a chairman of the trustee board--this was a separate school of course, and he was a rather portly white gentleman. He had been drinking too much. So he drove up--he did not drive up, but the person driving him drove up, and he felt that was the occasion for him to flirt, which he made the mistake of doing.

She tried to ignore him, and as he began to get more frustrated, they stopped the car and he started to get out. So she picked up a shovel. Now this was the man that signs my mother's paycheck. She picked up the shovel, and said, "If you come one step closer I will try to kill you." He then got back in the car. I witnessed that.

In those days, things were legally segregated. One time, she went into a little town, Seminole. She wanted a drink of water, so she went into the drugstore and went to the counter. They handed her water in a paper cup. She became very irate about that, and slammed it down on the counter. She went to the chamber of commerce and said to the people, "You are constantly asking people to come into this city to trade, and I had come to trade, and this is the treat- ment--. II

I cite that as examples of her willingness to personally go out on the line and challenge things, even though in those days blacks were legally segregated. They could say to blacks, "You go around to the back," and "do this and do that .I1

I don't think my parents made a special effort to insulate us from the reality of these things, but said, yes indeed, this did exist. But somehow, it never penetrated our psyche. In other words, Canson: it never came through that there was something wrong with us. What came through was that people who mistreat other people, there's something wrong with them. They are the persons that you have to try to work to help and educate.

She, through all of that, in her own personal examples before me, still clung to the fact that she would like me, as her daughter, to be in a comfortable home, with a good husband and children, and protected from the rigors of being out there.

So, they decided that Tuskegee [Institute] was a good place for me to go to college. I did go to college at Tuskegee. At the time I had reached my sophomore year, my brother had gotten out of high school, and things were not very good financially. We never had much money. They had to borrow money in the summer. The teachers would teach maybe for nine months. In some of those little country schools, the kids would go in, and when the time came to pick the cotton, they closed the schools until cotton picking time was over. Not being very adept at picking cotton, and seeing them out there doing it, we just didn't go to school in that period.

Anyway, I had met this young man that I later married. He was graduating at the end of my sophomore year. He had grown up in Sacramento. I always say to my daughter, "Never fall in love with an upperclassman, because it puts your own college career at risk." You have to make a decision--which I did.

I met Clarence at Tuskegee in 1938. When he finished, we decided that we would get married, so we did in fact get married on August 7, 1940. We had a little ceremony there in Lima, Oklahoma. We left the next day, coming to California.

I had had two years at Tuskegee, and stayed on honor roll, and I had been doing very well. I had my job back. I used to work for Monroe Work, who was in the library at Tuskegee, in what we call the Department of Records and Research. Monroe Work had the responsibility of compiling what had gone on in the lives of black people. Of course, in those days, it was "colored peopleff--in a given year.

My job was to clip out accounts of lynchings. I would go into the library at Tuskegee. First, I worked in the laundry, and then I got moved from there to the library, where I worked under Monroe Work. That, I think, had an impact. A sociology person, Dr. Charles Gomillion, who was plaintiff in the famous lawsuit, Gomillion v. Lightfoot, had a major influence. As a matter of fact, I hear from Dr. Gomillion two or three times a year. Whenever he sees something in the paper someplace, he writes me. He lives in Washington, D.C. Canson: I participated in some social activities at Tuskegee, but primarily I was busy; I was majoring in home economics, of all things. My husband was majoring in tailoring. At that time, all the students at Tuskegee had to work, regardless of how rich or how poor.

Sharp: That was part of it?

Canson: That was part of it. There were students who came on the five-year plan, which means that they could work a lot.

Those were good days. Those were really good days. I remember Mrs. [Eleanor] Roosevelt coming to Tuskegee. They had a way of--I guess colleges still do that--of bringing really outstanding people. We had all the things you had to go through at Tuskegee on a Founder's Day, which is in April. We used to alwaysjoke and say that the flowers would suddenly bloom for Founder's Day. Anyway, I did have an opportunity to see Mrs. Roosevelt pretty close up.

We used to have to march to chapel. In Tuskegee we all wore uniforms. The courting situation at Tuskegee was absolutely amusing when I--

Sharp: Did you have someone who went with you as a chaperone?

Canson: Oh! Well, you had to have a slip to get off campus. You didn't just walk off and on the campus. The home economics building was over here [gestures], like this was the home ec., and the campus here, and the store over here in Greenwood, "on the block," they called it. It had the best ice cream in the world. It was across the street, but you had to go all the way back to the administration building and get a slip, and then go back. And then there were the times you would just up and go.

The fellows didn't have that big a problem, but on Sundays, on Sundays, when we really had our official courting time, it went sort of like this: You would go to chapel. Everybody had to go. Then you would go to lunch. Then, the girls would go out and select a bench. We had a beautiful lawn at Tuskegee, and so you would go and you would select abench, and you would sit there all demure, waiting for the time that the fellows could come and sit beside you, and you would have your social visit.

The fellows, on the other hand, would be across the street near the administration building, in front of Carnegie Hall. Carnegie Hall, as the name implies, was a contribution. There was a big great wisteria vine there, that had grown all over the tree, which was Canson: absolutely gorgeous. That's important, because we have tried to get a replica of that wisteria to grow in our yard over the years in Sacramento.

Sharp: Did it work?

Canson: It's working, but we don't have enough sun to make it justburst fully into bloom.

Anyway, the fellows would stand here, across the street, girls sitting here on the lawn, like this, and then there was a gazebo, but it was called the bandstand. The band would be there, and it would play. So, they would start with some very militaristic type of music, and play. That was the signal that it was time to go. The fellows would come traipsing over and sit down, and you would have a couple of hours. We listened to the band concert, all classics, and all those other kinds of stuff.

Sharp: It sounds wonderful.

Canson: It was, really.

Sharp: Were there teachers walking around, checking things out?

Canson: Well, they were always appropriately placed. They were always appropriately placed. There was a big dining hall, Tompkins Hall. [gestures] This is the lawn, and here's Tompkins.

I never will forget: my mother had made what I thought was a very pretty dress. It was a grey stiped dress with a red zipper that came all the way down the front. My husband must have been a brash young man. We were chatting one time in front of the dining hall, Tompkins Hall. It's a beautiful old building. It had a porch. Across the way, of course, was the administration building. So Clarence just reached and got the zipper, and went zip [gestures downward] like that.

Seated upstairs in the administration building was the dean of men, who happened to see that little incident. He called my husband up for a conference. My husband, at that time, was a lieutenant in the R6C [Reserve Officers' Training Corps] at Tuskegee. The dean of men thought it appropriate to have his rank reduced from lieutenant to sergeant, which was heartbreaking. That went on for about a week, until my husband sat down and talked to him, and talked him into giving back what they call--the stripe they wore was called a Sam Brown. So, that got restored, and he moved back to his arrogant position as a lieutenant. [laughs] Canson: When he finished, we decided we would get married, and we came to live in Sacramento where his family has lived for over fifty years. I11 WORKING WITH THE NAACP AND THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, 1953-1967

Early Volunteer Work with the -NAACP Credit Union in Sacramento, 1953-1965

Canson: My arrival in California--you know, very much in love and all that other kind of stuff--went okay. However, it was a cultural shock for me, because I had been used to moving among, not wealthy people, but people that I have described. I didn't see any symbols for black people. Clarence's father was in business. That was a positive symbol. But there were no teachers. There were no policemen. It was just there.

The people had mediocre positions. One of the major social events among the black people was the garbagemen's picnic. I had been used to fraternity and sorority dances, and that kind of thing. It was quite a cultural shock. At one point I used to say I didn't know whether I wanted my children to even go to high school in California.

My son came along in '41. I had begun to feel that I had to put those examples out, that I had to do some things. I started volunteering. We really didn't intend for me to work, as such, and I really didn't work for a long time. But I volunteered and did a lot of things. So, one thing led to another.

I played piano for the church there. Although I had been reared as a Presbyterian, at the time I came to Sacramento, I don't think Westminister Presbyterian Church at Thirteenth and N was ready for me. They were not ready for integration. I was not ready for them. So I went on and participated with the Shiloh Baptist church. he thing led to another. Canson: A gentleman, whose name is D.D. Mattocks, who is now dead, who had founded the NAACP Credit Union in Sacramento, was quite good friends with my husband's family. We used to argue and carry on so. It came as a shock to me when he was ill. I knew that he was not going to get well. He told his attorney, Nathaniel Colley, that there was one person he would like to hand this over to. So, I moved into the credit union arena at that point.

I had been active with the NAACP chapter as a youth advisor. As a matter of fact, that pen set [on the desk] over there I feel very proud of. The kids gave it to me as their advisor in 1952, It's a long time.

I did work in trying to help blacks get employed in places like Safeway and Pacific Telephone. Safeway hired the first black, The John Breuner company hired the first black-during that period when I was working.* Campbell Soup Company, which was anti-union--our timing on that fight was tied in with when they were negotiating for the contracts.

What the union did was that they joined forces with us. I don't know that they had put the hiring of blacks as a priority, but at least that was the benefit. That first man got hired, and there were big celebrations and all that,

I have been doing some work with the phone company, very close in recently. I often think back to those days when the man told me that they just were not ready for blacks in the phone company. That's been a long time.

Then, we did some things with a man who's now dead, Chuck Woodruff, who was an officer with the phone company. First, Chuck and those could not understand why, in their summer programs, they never had blacks. The company in Sacramento--I don't know whether they did it systemwide--had programs where they would bring counselors into a sort of training session, so that they could understand business, and they could counsel kids better.

It was a very good thing to do, but as we began to ask them about employment and other things, then they came back to us, saying, "Why is it we don't have any black counselors ?"

So I said, "Describe how you recruit the people that come.''

"Well, we talk to the school district."

*Breuners is a major regional home furnishings retailer. Canson: I said, "That's your first mistake, because that's the biggest obstruction." Of course, you can imagine the shock on the minds of the business people when they figure, if you're going to go for a counselor in the school district, you go to the superintendent's office. Then we explained to them how the superintendent's office was a part of the problem, and they would never get black counselors.

In the first place, we doubted whether black counselors existed in the system at that particular time in Sacramento.

Sharp: By black counselor, do you mean vocational counselors instead of school-supplied counselors?

Canson: The counselors were regular school counselors.

Sharp: Those more over-all kind of counselors.

Canson: Yes. It was not necessarily a vocational counselor. I see all education as preparatory t~ some kind of gainful employment, or some kind of productive use of your life. It was after that period that I got exposed to the division and all the internal problems when one says, "vocational education," and "academic education." In the old days, we couldn't fool with that luxury of the separatism Teachers taught and tried to give you a general education, so you would be first a better human being.

[The interviewee added the following comment during her review of the transcript]

Sharp's question--"Do you mean vocational counselors instead of school-supplied counselors?"--provoked this response and a flash back to my experiences as a member of the California Advisory Board on Vocational and Technical Education.

There were SO frequently long discussions ab cut vocational education versus academic education. Counseling was also referred to as vocational counseling or academic counseling.

I feel the differences--vocational versus academic--are harmful categorizations and have an impact on children. I believe the best counseling is that which focuses on the educational needs and the child's potential. Often black children are steered away from academic pursuits and tracked into vocational ed, Canson: My reference to "in the old days" was to the era of my parents when they counseled youth to perform at their best levels. Many young people who went on to college from the schools in which they taught would have been "counseled" into a vocational education course.

[Transcript resumes.]

So, we were able to get Mr. and Mrs. Braxton, who were retired teachers and vice principals in Sacramento. John and Ann Braxton were invited by the phone company to go through this course. It really was kind of external to the school system, because they would not have found them through the process. So, we've had an ongoing relationship with the phone company, but it started way back a number of years before.

I managed the credit union for almost thirteen years.

Sharp: Was the credit union in Sacramento something particular just to Sacramento, or were there others within the NAACP?

Canson: There were other NAACP credit unions. They weren't necessarily linked together in a formal sort of structure. Each one was sort of free- standing. D.D. Mattocks was the person who initiated that, persuaded the national NAACP to authorize, to give us permission to move ahead to organize the Sacramento branch NAACP credit union.*

In the meantime, I think I need to bring my husband along, too, because there were some things happening in his life that were important. He finished college in 1940, with a B.S. in tailoring. His father was in the tailoring business in Sacramento, and well known among a lot of people there.

He came home from college, and had difficulty getting employment even with a college degree. He went to work for the federal government at McClellan Field. He first started working on a dump truck. His supervisor was a white fellow from Georgia with a third grade education. So that went on, and he was earning $100 a month.

Sharp : What a disappointment.

"Reverend D.D. Mattocks was a minister for the Kyles Temple A.M.E. .Zion Church, and a former agent for Golden State Mutual Insurance Co . headquartered in Los Angeles. Canson: Yes. Our son came along in June of 1941, June 22nd of '41. We made it along with his $100 a month salary. With Clarence's family being as close, we were able to make it. I was not working, except doing volunteer stuff, all during that period. That kind of thing went on for a number of years.

Finally, he volunteered to go in the service. With a college degree, with several years of ROTC exposure, he volunteered to go in. He thought he should be able to go in at least at the officer level. He ran into a prejudiced doctor who said that he had a spot on his lungs, and would not qualify because of physical problems. He had a second opinion, and the other doctor said, "Well, you've just run into prejudice ."

We decided after that, that if they wanted to do that, fine, he would just stay out. He got busy and bought a home, and decided that he wouldn't be needed in the war effort. That went along fine. A few years passed, I've forgotten how many, and they recruited him. He went in as a private, with all of that training.

I then went to work for the Signal Corporation. They have an installation in Sacramento,.and worked while he was in the service. When he got out and came back home in about 1947 and went back out to McClellan, he sensed the same old problems.

We took a long vacation with our children, with our son and the young child who was a relative of his that we had taken in as a foster person.

[During her review of the transcript, the interviewee recalled additional details about that vacation. ]

That was a particularly significant vacation. We went first to Portland, Oregon where we both participated in the Grand Lodge. My husband is a Prince Hall Mason. I am a past matron of Adah Chapter No. 1, Order of the Eastern Star.. I was matron the year we took the vacation.

We traveled from Portland along the Columbia River through states of Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota and Iowa.

We visited with my uncle, Dr. Richard Dobson and his wife Naomi Pallord Dobson. Uncle "Doc" was a very successful doctor in Sioux City. Aunt Willie, his wife, was very active in community affairs.

Uncle Doc spent a great deal of time with my husband during our visit with them in Sioux City. Canson: I am sure during those visits he encouraged my husband to pursue something more than government employment. He, my uncle, urged me to get my brother to move to California and get advanced degrees. I did not see my uncle again. He died a few years after that visit. He was quite a man!

[Transcript resumes.]

He came back, and had a chance to think it through, and he decided that he had had enough of McClellan Field. So although he remained, he enrolled in law school. He went through law school at McGeorge. As a matter of fact, he was the first black graduate of what is now UOP [University of the Pacific] .

He came out of that, and then resigned at McClellan, and went into private practice. That was going along concurrent. While I was doing some NAACP work, the credit union and other activities, he was moving out and up as well.

In '52 we had our little girl, Faythe, who lives with me here in Oakland.* I was sort of growing and expanding in the credit union, so she was the real NAACP orphan in the family. [laughs] Our son came along in the days when I had no idea of going outside the house to work. But she seems to have survived it.

Sharp: Her early days were spent accompanying you to some of the NAACP events?

Canson: Yes. More so than our son. She would come to the office. It was very interesting. I was managing the credit union. My husband moved his office from Fifth and Broadway, in Sacramento, to Twenty-first Street, where his father owned the office building, so I moved too. She used to go to Newton Booth School, and she would come to the office until we were ready to go home, and fool around with the machines and that kind of thing.

She has had a career in banking which, I am sure, that had a lot to do with. She would see me balancing the books and doing all that other kind of thing.

Sharp: She grew accustomed to seeing that kind of work done?

*Mrs. Canson added during her review that Faythe recently married and moved to Phoenix. At the time of the review in late 1985, the Cansons were expecting their first grandchild. Canson: She did indeed. She went to Tuskegee in 1970. That didn't work too well. Then, she went to Chicago to live, because our son lived there. He was there doing his residency at Northwestern [University]. She remained there until the summer of '83. She had gotten married, and that didn't work, so she got a divorce and moved back home in '83. But she had about ten years of banking behind here, with Harris Trust Bank in Chicago.

I attribute that definitely to those experiences very, very early when she was a little girl, with the credit union that I was managing. She participated with the NAACP in the youth council activities in Sacramento. I took her to a number of the national conventions, so she has had all that kind of exposure.

In the meantime, our sonms doing his growth in the medical area. The influences in his life, I would say, are Dr. Kenneth Johnson, in Sacramento, and a Dr. Carl Drake, and Dr. Carl Drake's son, Carl Drake, Jr. They were primary influences. In addition, I think that things that he heard his father say also influenced him. These were the kinds of things: When my husband was growing up in Sacramento, they may have had one or two black janitors working for the State of California.

I was in Sacramento when they hired the first [black] secretary. Jimmy Roosevelt hired a lady who is now dead, Iverna Anderson. The careers, beyond the janitor and garage and all that level, were exceedingly limited. There were one or two doctors, Dr. Johnson was one of them. Dr. Roscoe Brewer, a dentist, was another. There were very few positive symbols.

He always said he wanted to be a doctor, my husband did. He recalls Dr. Melvyn Lawson, who later became superintendent of schools, counseling him. He and Judge Clinton White came along at the same time. The counseling went like this: "Well now, you fellows, you ought to [finish] high school [so you can] get one of those good state jobs."

One time, in a history class, at Sacramento City College, they were having a discussion of the slavery period. The teacher said, 'We want to have a frank discussion, so you don't really have to come if you don't want to." But my husband insisted on coming. Whether or not growing up hearing his father tell those stories over again had an influence on Clarence Junior's decision to be a doctor, I don't know.

We're at now at about '52 or so, my daughter has come along. Grandma keeps her a great deal, but when she got big enough she did go with me to a lot of the conferences and the meetings. The credit union continued to grow. When I took it, the assets were about $39,000. When I left, I have forgotten the year, [I9651 it was almost $400,000. Canson: That was something that I felt we needed to embrace, so I did play quite a role during the administration of Franklin H. Williams, who was a regional director-counsel for the NAACP. Franklin later went onto become ambassador to Ghana. I've forgotten which president's administration that was in.

My responsibility, participating voluntarily at the regional level at that time--most of the activity I have been describing has been centered primarily in Sacramento--the credit union, my leadership role as an advisor to the youth, and the labor and industry effort and that kind of thing. That is Sacramento. But I did voluntarily participate at the regional level, and was a member of Franklin Williams's advisory group. We would get together three or four times a year and talk about things.

I worked on organizing credit unions in NAACP chapters. Vallejo had one. San Mateo. Seattle. Fresno. Stockton. And, of course, there was Sacramento. Most of them have sort of gone by the wayside now, plagued with high delinquencies and this kind of thing. In about '6&something, the War on Poverty legislation passed.

Sharp: Nineteen sixty-five is the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and I think it's right after that.

Canson: Right in that era. There was that great community-action component of the legislation. I saw the linkage between the consumer education component in the credit union and buying club organization, and relief for poor people.

Well, I guess I have to back up and talk about the Pat [Edmund G.] Brown [Sr.] years. He had appointed me to the Advisory Council of the Consumer Counsel. Helen Nelson, who was a very outstanding person, and a very fair person, but very thoroughly despised by the business community.

I had served on the Advisory Council to the Consumer Counsel, and had been a member of the board of the California Association of Consumers, and a board member of the California Credit Union League, so that when the legislation passed where there was the community action component, I wrote a proposal called the Low Income Family Economics, the LIFE proposal.

The idea there was to use the NAACP credit union as a base from which we taught people how to more wisely use their resources. Here now, I'm hopping all the way back to my home economics training. The Canson: original career goal which I thought I had for myself was to be a home demonstration agent in the IU.S.] Department of Agriculture. They go around and teach people, and you make the little things, and you save your money when you can, and you do all that kind of stuff. That was my part of my dreams emerging through that particular process. That eventually got funded.

Sharp: This would be War on Poverty--

Canson: The War on Poverty money, through the Office of Economic .Opportunity [OEO]. At the Sacramento level, Marion Woods was the executive director at that particular time. Marion and I have been friends and co-workers a long, long time.

That got put in place, and I didn't stay with the credit union too long after that, because Paul ~'Rourke,who was the state director of OEO, heard of the project. We met, and he said he wanted me to come to work at the state level.

By the way, let me back up to a conversation that I had with Chuck Woodruff of Pacific Telephone. During all the time we had first worked together, it was on the business of blacks and education, and blacks and employment, and how to improve that, and how to deal with the high failure rate of blacks on test scores who wanted to go to work for the phone company.

Somehow or another, he was reading something and saw myname as a member of the board of the California Association of Consumers. We never talked about my participation with the consumer movement. One day he said, "I didn't realize that you were in this." At that time, maybe, the consumer movement was dealing with phone rates and that kind of stuff.

So, I told him, "Yes." We talked about that, and I convinced him of the need for that. The phone company started its consumer program that grew out of those conversations that we had. Where it is now, I don't know. So many things emerged as a result. We would go to lunch maybe three or four times a year and just talk for two or three hours. You begin to see things flow from that. If not flow, at least dim little twinklings. State Office of Economic Opportunity, 1965-1967; Neighborhood Action Program

Canson: I then left the local level of NAACP work, and went to work for the state Office of Economic Opportunity.

That went along pretty well. Prior to the Watts riots, I did things: I would attend conferences; I would go out and meet with groups, meet with community action agencies and discuss with them the significance of their having a consumer component to their overall anti-poverty programs. In a number of instances they formed buying clubs, credit unions and started consumer education programs.

In the Central Valley, they organized several buying clubs. Out here at Hunters Point, we worked together with the Bay Area Neighborhood Development Group, which was a spin-off from the co-operative movement in Berkeley. Art Danforth and some other names that have long since escaped my memory, we all worked together on the Hunters Point Co-op, which does not exist anymore.

Mary Hall, who was with Ag [Agricultural] Extension at the Univer- sity [of California], I worked with her in their establishment in East Oakland. I think one of them is still going. There is a consumer group out there now. Whether or not that is a spin-off--you lose track of these things. Mary was a very important person.

We had some interesting dialogue with the Ag Extension people. I can't think of that professor's name now. Being a kind of rabble-rouser, we always tried to point up how really the University [of California] system, with Davis as a prime example, and Ag Extension at the university level, was really more of a handmaiden for agri- business than an educational institution which put emphasis on how you-I'm just thinking of the issues we used to talk about.

Research that was people-oriented was always missing. The Department of Agriculture seemed to be so insensitive in terms of the potential that some of the programs they had for the poor that could really work and teach people to consume. For. example, there were few research projects aimed at needs, but continuing research to benefit agribusiness.

That concept in the inner city would have been a good concept. It eventually started coming around. Even in the credit union itself we had to do some work. I was one of the main agitators in terms of trying to get the credit union movement itself to see its potential in waging the war on poverty. Canson: I was able to get Dr. O'Rourke to approve a small grant to the California Credit Union League, so the consultant, whose name I have forgotten, worked with me. He was an employee of the California Credit Union League, so together we worked on getting credit unions started among the poor.

The one that I'm most proud of is the one we were able to get going in Watts. It's the Watts United Credit Union. That one is still going today. I have a few shares in it, not many.

I'm now talking about '64, somewhere up there. I knew Esther Peterson, who was the consumer counsel under the [Lyndon B.] Johnson administration, and I went to several national conferences. I think some of that is covered in the resum; there.

191 never forget--I was in Washington, at a conference, a national White House conference on civil rights, and I had the call saying, "~on'tcome back to Sacramento, go on to Los Angeles." The riots had taken place.

So, we did. I flew from Washington to Los Angeles.

Sharp: hat's August of '65?

Canson: August of '65. I was met by Jimmy Reese, a young man who is now a judge in Los Angeles. Our assignment was to find a location where the state could open up its service center, the first supermarket of services, you know.

At that time, people were just throwing money--whatever you said, you could do. The riots really had shaken the thing up. It was a very devastating riot. I got there about August 12. Jimmy and I found a place on 103rd and South Central. It was to have been a savings and loan office owned by then Assemblyman [F. Douglas] Ferrell, who is now dead. We persuaded Dr. Paul O'Rourke and the governor's office that that was a good place to locate, and we opened up this supermarket. Wade McClain served as the director of the center. I had the desk for consumer services. I did that from '65 to '66, somewhere in that area. We would have people come in to tell us about things that they had in pawn shops that they were not reimbursed for, although insurance companies were reimbursing the pawn shops.

The Neighborhood Adult Participation Project was a War on Poverty program headed by Opal Jones, and funded through the city. Opal is a social worker. She's retired now. What she did was to take welfare recipients off welfare, pay them a flat $400 a month, and train them, and then assign them to various agencies. They functioned as sort of change agents . Canson: What Opal tried to do was to say, "You can bring into this situation the experiences of the poor. You can then interpret, to the poor, the agency. Then, hopefully, that process will change."

That was a very controversial program. Mayor Sam Yorty could not abide that, because he saw it as a political organization. It did have political potential, but the idea was to bring those entities together.

What she did, she set up outposts. They had about fifteen or twenty outposts where people could come into the centers and get various kinds of advice, and various kinds of services. We would go through training. I did a lot of training in terms of consumer problems and sensitizing phe people. /I /I The multi-service centers that I'm describing under NAPP [Neighborhood Adult Participation Project] were funded through the War on Poverty. Some of them were bases that the state used, and others were not. The state did go on to set up more service centers in other parts of the state, but it all grew out of that first thing that was done hastily. They got furniture in there and we were opened in less than a week.

In those days, people could walk in and say, "I want to talk to the governor." Nine times out of ten, they would get a chance to do it, to go into the governor's office. Pat Brown would come in and out of Los Angeles. I flew back and forth from Sacramento then.

I'll never forget when I arrived in on the twelfth. Jirmny [Reese] picked me up at the airport, and then Bill Becker, who was at that point in Governor Brown's office, and I got together.* We went to the Westminister Neighborhood House at 103rd and Beach streets.

*Interested readers may want to see Becker's own oral history interview, "Working for Civil Rights: With Unions, the Legislature, and Governor Pat Brown," conducted in 1979, Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, 1981. Canson: The people had come from the neighborhood to this meeting, and it was really a gripe session. Hugh Taylor, Bill Becker, Jimmy Reese, and a couple other people were there. We were there taking all that heat. Every time that [Police] Chief [William H.] Parker's name was mentioned, there would just be one big scream. One guy had a bullhorn. It was quite an experience.

That went on for about a year. We organized buying clubs in small communities. I did a lot of work in East Los Angeles. Tony Rios and the girl's name [Rosie?] I cannot remember. Tony is an old- line CSO person, Community Service Operation, which preceded Cesar Chavez 's operat ion IUni ted Farmworkers Organizing Committee] . Anyway, that went on, and then,of course, comes the election. That was when Reagan challenged Pat Brown. Pat was going for his third term.

So then, on the scene steps Reagan to run, and did in fact run, and won.

I'll never forget, it sort of decimated the War on Poverty office, because everybody in it was a deadbeat from their perspective, and "we didn't need it," and it was "a waste of money" and "a boondoggle."

Kirke Wilson, who is here with the Rosenberg'Foundation now, as its executive director, was one of the persons who worked there as OIRourke's deputy--Paul O'Rourke, who I think is up in Sonoma County now, and is a very fine, sensitive doctor; Jimmy Reese, who is now a judge; and a few of us; Verne Horn--I don't know where Verne is. We were there in Sacramento, and it was pretty obvious that that agency was not going to be long for this world.

My decision to leave--I had been approached by some of the people who Reagan had brought in. There was a Bob [Robert J.] Keyes, a guy named [Jim] Johnson, 1 think, whc is a stockholder in Air Cal, or at least was. (Air Calwas just getting started in those days.) Very.conservative people. All black. These are black people I'm talking about now. Overtures were being made. One other person, whose face I can see, but I can't think of his name--

Sharp: Was it Martin Dinkins?

Canson: Marty! I believe it was Marty! The people that were around him-- there was Jim Flournoy, a lawyer who has always run for some kind of office or another. He's an old-line kind of Republican. Then there was Bob Keyes, and there was Marty-- Sharp: Martin Dinkins, Bob Keyes, and James Flournoy are the three conservative black people within the governor's office?

Canson: The names keep popping up, huh?

Sharp: Yes. That was going to be one of my questions, what your relationship with Bob Keyes was.

Canson: Oh, that grew to be quite a relationship, and a very positive one.

Theron Bell was another person. They were people brought in, and of course one or two of them, I don't remember who, had made overtures: "Wouldn't you like to stay in the administration? I'm sure there's a place for you," and all that.

So, I said, "Well, you know, I have to think about things. I just don't know. The governor has campaigned that his first act would be to eliminate the Rumford Fair Housing [Act]. We put so many years into that, and I'm committed to them."

mat made me decide to walk away and not have any association with that administration, was that I came back from lunch one day, and the word passed: "Did you hear what happened to Helen Nelson?"* This was before Reagan was even inaugurated as governor.

I said, "No, I didn't."

"The governor fired her."

I said, "What?"

"Yes, he did ."

So, I said, "Oh."

I just went to my desk, and started pulling out my little personal things and all, and I went to O'Rourke and I said, "Well, 1've had it. I wouldn't dare consider staying."

*Readers may be interested to see Helen Nelson's own oral history interview, "The First Consumer Counsel in California," conducted in 1979, Regional Oral History Office, The Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley, 1982. Canson: Bob Keyes and those others really were disappointed, because at least that would give them some positive image if I had remained. All hell was breaking loose in terms of what they were going to do for the consumer program, because Reagan targeted that one to destroy, and did, in fact, virtually destroy. IV FIELD DIRECTOR AND LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE, WEST COAST REGION, NAACP, 1967-1974

California Committee for Fair Practices; Fight to Save the Rumford Act; Vocational Education Advisory Council Appointment

Sharp: As early as '67, when you were leaving for--.

Canson: Oh, yes. After I resigned there, I was asked by the California Committee for Fair Practices if I would consider working for them. I had participated voluntarily with the group over the years.

It took a long time to pass the FEPC [Fair Employment Pract.ices Commission] law. We used to lobby for it year in and year out, and the people throughout the state would come, various groups, and we would have a mobilization. Biannually, I guess, really, because the legislative sessions were biannual then.

I would always get the church choir and find the church. You know, do all the grunt work. So, they knew me, and they knew of my work within the NAACP. I agreed to take that. That was on a very fragile funding base, because it depended on contributions and that kind of stuff. With the lull, when we had reached the real zenith when the law finally passed, people kind of sat back. That was in '59.

Some of the groups were not as zealous as they were, -but the challenge to the Rmford Fair Housing law did, in fact, mobilize the folks. So, I said yes, and I went to work for the California Committee .

Shortly after that, there was a position open with the NAACP as a field director. This would be one that the national would make the decision about. I was invited to apply for that. The span was maybe four or five months, or six months, or somewhere in there. I'd have to go back. I just don't remember the time frame. It may be that it's on there [indicates resume.] Canson: I then went to work, and the first thing was to save the Rumford Fair Housing law. We did a number of things to do that. We had a rally on the capitol steps. In here [gestures to folders] I have lots of things. The legislation that was introduced, Bob Badham's legislation--he is now a Congressman--AB 1. That was the governor's, to destroy the fair housing law. We worked very hard to defeat that. There was another, SB 9. I have some material relating to that here.

The groups mobilized, and they came, and we worked very, very hard.

[During her review the interviewee added to her comments about this work. ]

A key person in our fight has re-entered my life since your interview. He is Father Georg Kinnard. He is a Jesuit priest who teaches at U.S.F. He taught at a Catholic high school in Sacramento at that time. He brought the school band and a group of students. I have some video footage of our march and rally.

[The transcript resumes.]

Sharp: Let me stop you for a minute.

Canson: Sure.

Sharp: Proposition 14, in '64, nullified the Rumford Fair Housing Act, but then Prop. 14 was eventually declared unconstitutional, and these other bills were meant to do what Prop.14 had tried to do.

Canson: The interesting little aside there, that you may not pick up, is that attorney [Nathaniel] Colley, who, is a very brilliant lawyer, had said all along that Prop. 14 was illegal. Somehow, the ACLU [American Civil Liberties Union] folks in southern California either deliberately, or because they didn't know, kept touting him off of the principles. At that time, Loren Miller was alive. Loren is now dead, and he is the person who is credited with leading the charge, at the U.S. Supreme Court level, against the restrictive covenantstuff. Loren shared Nat Colley's legal assessment of Prop. 14.

Nat insisted that this was illegal, but through the lawyers' exchange, he allowed the ACLU guys down in southern California to tout him off his legal theories. And blessed be, they come back a few months later using the same theory to attack the thing, and were in fact successful. That left Nat feeling a little bitter. Canson: I share this because I think maybe these are the kinds of little things that happened in the struggle that may not be important, but if sometimes you see NAACP's reticence to coalesce in a lot of things, that's sort of how these things happen. That's a negative part. It's too bad. It gets to be competitive in the fight, as you well know.

Anyway, it was in fact challenged, and then they came back to do it legislatively, as you've indicated. By that time we had managed, and I had tried, over the years, to work with the governor's Palace Guard people, those who would listen. Bill Becker and Sherrill Luke were there when Pat Brown was there. I kept coming through to Bob [Keyes], and I would talk with him.

He managed to get Reagan to agree to go-around in the communities and listen to the people, and talk about fair housing, and to get Reagan to back away somewhat on his rabid opposition to the fair housing law. We won it. We defeated those people who were trying to do that. From that point on, Bob and I developed a very good working relationship. We would talk about things. I recognized the role he had to do. We had disagreements. We certainly had disagreements on the California [Job] Plan, which was some sort of thing to expand busi- ness and employment opportunities for blacks. It was a sort of mutual pact among contractors, organized labor and the state. Everybody was going to be nice. No teeth or nothing of that kind.

But I did understand Bob's position, and we did talk. We came to respect him a great deal in NAACP circles. I had many a conversation with him. He's now dead.

Sharp: If I might ask you, why was he in the governor's office?

Canson: He was a community relations specialist.

Sharp : Which means?

Canson: Well, it means that you advise the governor on the black affairs. It means you run around and put out fires. It means you tell people how the governor cares and all that kind of stuff . [George] Deukmej ian is sort of setting up a similar structure now. Jerry [Edmund G.] Brown [Jr.] had a similar kind of thing. Percy Pinckney headed that. I think Deulanejian is going at it from: "We're going to have one for the chicanos, and one for the Asians, and one for the blacks." I don't know the people who are heading this, but it has been a way that the governor has of keeping an ear to the ground on what's going on in the black community. People flpck in and dump all kinds of problems on him. Canson: [During her review the interviewee added the following comment regarding Governor Deukmejian's staff.]

I have since met Suzanne Fisher who is now Governor ~eulanejian's person for black affairs.

[Transcript resumes.]

I think the effectiveness of it depends on the personality of the person. Bob Keyes had all kinds of trouble with people like Ed [Edwin] Meese [IIIJ and Lyn [Franklin C.] Nofziger and all those, so that when he was really up a tree, he would break through and go directly to Reagan. He may not have been able to get everything that he wanted, but he had a good relationship with Reagan.

Sharp: Was it your feeling that Mr. Meese kept the gate a little bit, not want ing-- .

Canson: Yes. Oh, yes. Yes, definitely. He would give Bob a bad time. He really would give him a bad time.

Sharp: We have had some other people say that same basic conclusion. For example, that a packet of papers left for Mr. Reagan to see would never get to him, and by the time he got to the meeting where he was supposed to have read and understood what was in the packet, he had no idea what was being talked about.

Canson: Yes. My sense is that he just kept Reagan isolated from stuff. I would question whether or not he would be able to do that to Alex Sherriffs, because I think the governor really cared about Alex and depended upon him, so that in the struggle in the Palace Guard, Alex would not necessarily be shunted aside. Naturally, Ed Meese could just walk all over somebody like Bob Keyes: "You're just out there doing what those black people are talking about. hat's not important. "

I knew Nancy [Clark] Reynolds rather well. Nancy was the governor's PR [public relations] person. Nancy and I developed a sort of dialogue.

When I was serving on the credentials comittee of the Democratic National Convention in 1960 in Atlantic City--was it '60, or '64? Sixty, I think. She was a working reporter, and reporters were clambering trying to get news from what we were doing, because we were just absolutely locked in rooms. Nancy sent a little note in to me, and said, "Your family in California is anxious to hear from you." [laughs] I was supposed to go out and give her some information. Canson: My participation as a member of the credential committee of the 1964 Democratic National Convention in Atlantic City is one of the high points in my career. Pat Brown appointed me.

That was before Reagan's era. But at least I had met her then. We would chat every now and then, not so much in terms of issues. I would update her on things, but I really didn't expect a great deal out of it, because, I think, she was working. She had the press responsibilities for Reagan, and I think she worked pretty close with Mrs. Reagan, too. But she was just one of the people there and a pleasant person with whom I enjoyed talking.

This is very sensitive, what I'm about to say now. I sense that Nancy had to exert some muscle at one point. She had four boys, and the gossip was that there was some excessive familiarity on the part of some of the Palace Guard with one or two of her sons, so she threatened to blow the lid off the thing if that didn't get solved. That did, but that's very sensitive, and I'm just sharing it with you as a nuance, and I would--

Sharp: I've heard other--

Canson: Somebody else has said the same thing?

Sharp: Not really the same thing, no. And not involving those people. Relationships among some of the men in the governor's office. And it was early in the administration. It was very unfortunate for those people involved.

Canson: Well, what I had picked up was that it was beginning to spill over. Nancy saw it as a threat to her sons, and like any mother, she was ready to go after anybody's career if the governor didn't do something about it. I vaguely recall that somebody either got moved or something happened--I don't know. Anyway, she and I, of course, never talked about that. But I respected her, even in the midst of all that stuff, protecting her kids.

Where are we now?

Sharp: I have quite a few questions about the legislative advocacy.

Canson: It was a mixed kind of thing that I felt I had. You know, Reagan appointed me as a member of the Vocational and Technical Education Advisory Council. I think that was upon the recommendation of Ruth Love. Ruth and I have been friends over the years. That was when the new legislation passed. It was mandated that we had advisory councils. Canson: Another time, Paul Lawrence--who is a retired educator, and he used to be the regional commissioner of Education here. Dr. Paul Lawrence was seeking--you know how the federal government lets people go. It's like loaned executives. He was trying to get that done, and he was having some problems. We went in, the former regional director, Ieonard Carter and I, met with Reagan, and he helped us in that area.

I had some terrible fights with Reagan in terms of his appointments. His appointment design was to put a fairly decent, moderate human being out in front, as the head, and an absolute monster behind him.

A classic example was Spencer Williams,* as head of Health and Welfare [Agency], and Lucian Vandegrift, an ultraright-winger from up in Butte County, who is now a judge. Reagan made him a judge. As an assistant, he just cut things.

He had Earl Brian as head of Health [and Welfare Agency].** And then Bob [Robert] Carleson as his assistant .*** Carleson w-As just a get-'em-and-hang-'em sort of person.

Sharp: You'll see that those are some of our interviewees. canson: Indeed! Then he had Somebody White, over in [Department of] Industrial Relations. He was a former CIA person, or FBI person--I think he was an FBI person. Some of that is in here [indicates files]-- the battle to preserve the FEPC, although the chief that Reagan named, Paul Meaney, and I got to be good friends.

I approach this thing with [the idea that] these people have not been exposed to a whole lot. They have heard a whole bunch of stuff and this kind of thing, but there are a lot of experiences that they have not had.

"Spencer I. ~illiams,The Human Relations Agency: Perspectives and Programs Concerning Health, Welfare, and Corrections, 1966-1970, Regional Oral History Office, University of California, Berkeley, 1986.

**Earl Brian, "Great Political Debates Over Small Program Differences," in Governor ~eagan'sCabinet and Agency Administration, Regional Oral History Office, University of California, Berkeley, 1986.

***Robert Carleson, Stemming the Welfare Tide, Regional Oral History Office, University of California, Berkeley, 1985. Canson: They have not talked to black people who are not asking them for a job, and who can face them and say, "Here it is. Here is what you do not know, and you are in an important position. You may not have to go buy it all, but at least I have a responsibility to put it out there before you."

Sharp: Is that the root of the Reagan administration opposition to FEPC and affirmative action, the very idea of affirmative action?

Canson: I would say that it's a significant piece of it for Reagan himself. Whether it is for an Ed Meese, or this man who is heading the "Injustice" Department, I don' t know.

The Justice Department is absolutely in shambles. The aggressive stance--they go in jumping into things that have been settled. Ch the one hand they want to save money, and yet they want to reopen all this court stuff, stuff that's settled. Voluntary desegregation, employment things, they hop in the middle of that. And that's high cost anytime you open up stuff.

Anyway, Reagan himself, isolated from all that Heritage Foundation right-wing structure, has the potential, at least I felt in those days had the potential, to hear you out. To what degree he's a captive of all those other forces, I don't know. I think there's a lot of misunderstanding, and ignorance, and misinformation.

I think that maybe there are too few blacks in leadership roles at various levels, who feel secure enough to be absolutely candid with people, and say, "I bring you this to consider as an equal, and I don't have to temper it, because I am not looking for your job."

I always approached it by saying that I have a responsibility to put how I feel before you. Even in the legislative process, I really feel that same of the most effective testimony that you can get is from the person who is directly affected by this. I remember one time, we were battling the pawnbrokers in terms of raising interest rates. What we did was we got a white welfare recipient, along with other people, to testify with regard to her experiences on what she had had to do to pawn an item for $5 or $10 to buy milk for her kids, and what that would cost in terms of interest under this particular legislation.

Sharp: What she was really paying for it?

Canson: That's right. Maybe a $10 loan, that people would think about, might have cost her $5 in interest for a three-week period. Canson: I feel that that kind of specific thing brought before Reagan would get his attention. Whether or not it would mean anything before Meese, I would question it. It's almost impossible to pull him out of that on as many issues as we have problems with, and say, "Here he is." Of course, my own personal opinion is that the Republican party is being strangled to death, but who am I to say?

Helen Nelson and the Undoing of Her Work; The Watts Riots as a Consumer Revolt

Sharp: he of the things that is so dramatic about NAACP history in the Reagan administration in California is the number of very basit3 issues which the NAACP and the legislature and, by then, of course, this administration had to address. I was beginning to look through California Journal articles and other sorts of materials. It's employment; it's desegregation; technical legislation. But if you look at that eight-year period, it hits just about all the basic issues that NAACP does get involved with.

Canson: Oh, it does.

And the absolute demolition of concern for the consumer. He really went after that with a vengeance. Fortunately, Helen had put together--she was a perfectionist--some important kinds of things. But that was an agency established by statute, and it wouldn't be fair to Reagan to say that he was the only one who was apprehensive about that, because we always had to battle for budget, even under Pat.

Sharp: You know, we have an interview with Helen Nelson which is very interesting.*

Canson : Ch! Excellent.

Sharp: The Department of Consumer Affairs did, then, exist, under Don Livingston, and then John Kehoe.** Maybe we'll just start with the consumer legislation and the push that Jim [James S.] Reed and the

*Helen Nelson, "The First Consumer Counsel in California," an oral history interview conducted in 1979, Regional Oral History Mfice, The Bancroft Library, University of California at Berkeley, 1982.

**John T. Kehoe, "Advocacy for Education, Consumerism, and Governor Ronald Reagan, 1966-1974," an oral history interview conducted in 1982, Legislative Issue Management and. Advocacy, 1961-1974, Regional Oral History Off ice, The Bancroft ~ibrary, University of California at Berkeley, 1983. Sharp: Consumer Coalition and all that stuff that got started. Why was it that there had to be this Consumer Coalition at the NAACP, when there already was the Department of Consumer Affairs?

Canson: Jeepers. The first thing Reagan did was to make a dramatic statement that, "Yes, fellows, I told you that I would get her, and I did. " He fired her, and I think I mentioned that that was the thing that made me decide instantaneously that I was leaving. I would not discuss it. Then, the Advisory Council, I thought, was an important piece of that operation.

There was Don Vial, who chaired it, and then Mary Goldberg, and Eva Goodwin. Judge George Brunn now in Berkeley, I believe, was on it, and Clara--over in Berkeley, I saw her over at the ACLU dinner-- Shirpser, a well-known person.* Who else was on that committee? We met regularly, and had very good relations. I think Helen listened to us. The counsel meetings sort of fell by the wayside. Reagan appointed a woman who was certainly a far cry from Helen. I can't remember her name. I'm sure Helen would remember her name. He put her over there. /I /I I watched the Consumer Coalition die. Then the acceleration of attempts by various interests to--I can't remember the years when this--I gave you the example of the pawnbrokers" one increase.

I don't know whether it's under the Deukmejian administration or under--It's my understanding that the Department of Consumer Affairs has now prohibited people from testifying. There's always been the dialogue that had to go on at the cabinet level with regard to the governor's legislative program, but for there to be a prohibition against people being able to respond and come to testify--I can't really remember whether Reagan did that or not. I vaguely recall that somehow or another, the dialogue between legislature and Consumer Affairs was cut off, or seriously impaired.

The other approach was the voluntary stuff. Reagan really came at the consumer movement in a whole lot of different directions. The kinds of appointments I'm now describing make up a general feeling I got, that this was definitely an anti-consumer thing. Helen, I

*See Shirpser's own recollections of this committee in her oral history, One Woman ' s Role in Democratic Party Politics : National, California and Local, 1950-1973, an interview conducted 1972-1973, Regional Oral History Efice, The Bancroft Library, University of California at Berkeley, 1975. Canson: believe, was sort of the axis and the rallying point for a lot of groups, various consumer associations, voluntary things, plus the department thing.

I remember Bruce Samuels, who used to work with her. Bruce is a very pragmatic young man, and I'm not too sure how supportive Bruce was in those days when the heat got on. Everybody had to survive, I suppose. I guess there really wasn't that much to carry the thing forward internally in the governmental circles. Maybe we were much more dependent on Helen than we ought to have been, to keep everything moving.

I think Reagan went after that, maybe, with more vendetta than he did with the civil rights aspects of things.

Sharp: And the reason for going after it would be to eliminate unnecessary government, unnecessary bureaucracy?

Canson: Well, it would mean the regulations. Yes, regulations, in a sense, and perhaps the impact that that operation had as you get schools beginning to take a look at what they're teaching kids. In other words, getting people sensitized. Sacramento State's materials and curriculum being developed by the J.C. Penney Company for the home economics teachers--those are the kinds of things that Helen took a look at. She was a purist.

Everybody in Sacramento State [California State University, Sacramento]--not everybody, but when you see that--and you get your literature, and it's courtesy of this J.C. Penney Company. People tend to miss that. But the companies know how to expand it, and expand it, and the next thing you know, you've got watered down things about credit. You begin to ask high school principals, "Well now, let's see, you've got driver education going, but are you teaching those kids about insurance and maintenance?"

She's a brilliant woman, and a prophetic kind of person. I know the time we went through looking at the whole business of licensing. When you license in the state, are you really licensing to develop confidence, or to limit competition? The big fight we had in terms of the Electronic Repair Bureau, we advocated a practice of registration which was broader than licensing. Licensing tends to eliminate and restrict.

Then, the whole business of laymen on regulatory boards and commissions, non-industry people was a concept we espoused. There were a whole lot of fundamental kinds of attacks that Helen was making that just drove them up the wall, aimed at equipping the consumer to defend himself in the marketplace. Sharp: It sounds like the bottom line of what she was trying to accomplish. In that article about the Consumer Coalition that I mentioned,* it then described a variety of legislative bills that different assembly- men and senators were supporting. Most of them were called 1 Iprotective'' legislation in the sense that they were meant to more thoroughly regulate debt collection, for example--that kind of thing. Bill Greene offered two bills that had to do with debt collection; Leon Ralph offered some bills about advertising.

Canson: Oh boy! Here's a few little goodies here. [indicates papers] These are primarily "Prop. One" things. I really had a nostalgic journey yesterday when I was going through this.

Sharp: So this is the 1973 tax limit initiative.

Canson: Oh yes, that was Reagan's big tax measure. I have to find it. It really was one of the early forerunners that should have alerted us to Prop. 13.

Sharp: One of the main people involved in the governor's task force which developed this Prop. 1 was Lewis Uhler, whose name I'm sure you must know. Lewis Uhler came into OEO IOffice of Economic Opportunity] in ' 70, and helped to veto the second year funding for CRLA. [California Rural Legal Assistance ]

Canson: Yes, yes, yes.

Sharp: So your description of what was happening in OEO before that period was interesting, because we have quite a bit of information on Mr. Uhler.**

Canson: Oh yes. That's a name that had kind of--Yes indeed, Lewis Uhler. He wrecked the thing.

*See "Consumer Groups Come Together to fight for Protective ~e~islation,"California Journal, July-August, 1971, pp. 203-4, 214.

**See Lewis K. Uhler, "Chairman of Task Force in Tax Reduction," in The History of Proposition 111: Precursor of California Tax Limitation Measures, Oral History Program, Claremont Graduate School, Claremont, 1982. Sharp: He didn't stay at OEO very long, just a year, but the amount of work he did by the end of a year was considerable.

Canson: Whitaker and Baxter were hired to do the thing.

You know, the night that the election took place, I went out to an election party with Jay Michaels, from the university. We went out to A. Alan Post's house. That was the night that Marcus Foster got killed. There we were sitting, really rejoicing over the defeat of Proposition 1, and then the news flashed. It was quite a night. Whether the record should reflect that Alan Post had any significant role in the defeat of Prop. 1, I don't know. But at least--I guess it's really not that big of a secret--he was in Californians Against Proposition No. 1. This is the statement that we made.*

You have to stop me. I get to a certain point, and I just hang there.

He did some good things. Here we go [rustling papers], Californians Against Proposition 1. I have multiple copies of a lot of this stuff.

Sharp: We might duplicate some of this to include along with the interview. It's very explanatory and descriptive, and really helps a lot.

Canson: Oh well, then I will start--Here's a statement here from our NAACP, that's extra. A letter from the League of Women Voters. I don't know that I need to keep all this. (We really did have a dynamic coalition.) CTA [California Teachers Association]. And this is [Evelyn P.] Kaplan's statement. Citizens' Coalition Against Proposition 1. As a matter of fact, you could look through this and decide what you like: I'm just pulling stuff, but there may be things that I'm missing that you would like.

I guess, basically, we could take Prop. 1, and stretch it to a consumer kind of issue. One point that I didn't make, that I wanted to make, because I was assigned to work--I started talking about the Neighborhood Adult Participation aides. I had two assigned in the office there. That was during the time that the McCone Commission was at work.

*See following pages for this statement. nTIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCZHENT OF COIQRED PEOPLE WEST COAST REGION 995 Market Street - 16th Floor San Francisco, California 94103 ...... ;-. (415) 986-6992

SmTmIN OPPOSITION TO PmPOSITION 1 GOVERNOR^ s TAX INITIATIVE) . .

NAACP opposes Proposition 1 for three primary reasons: ...... 1. The proposition does nothing to change the present practice . . .- . ) , . . . . of the rich paying less taxes than they should. The

burden of taxation remains on the backs of the working , * middle and lower middle income citizens and the poor.

2. Proposition 1 weakens representative government. It .,- mtrikes at the heart of representation by elected repremen-

tatives chosen by the people in their districts. The .'I . .* ...... proposition is another case of the misuse of the initiative ...... process by the rich and the powerful...... 3. The supporters of Proposition 1 do not tell the people .... r l..... , .. that a heavy percentage of state government spending im ...... : :. . . fixed and will not be changed by the passage of this ...... ::;, ..; : .; :.- *. proposal. It is clear that only spending for social pro- ...... = : :, r< , ,'. gram such as in education, health care, welfare and other ...... :,... , ...... mocial mervices vill be frozen out by the new ceiling on ...... , ...... , . . atate spending if this proposition is passed...... La.:'.- .... Once again, vested interests are exploiting and mimwing ... .'! .!, > t r .... the initiative process. They seek to lock into ou;' ~ilifornir . -,. .. d.i.1...... -.. c.1. . ,;. ::. ., .!..:.:.! 7 Sate Constitution advantages for the rich and ihe pokrful.

.... " "". .I . . . . :...... ,A ,... -,-,.I:, .:.. mi8 im not the first time vs have seen this happan. It is .... i," :.., happening more frequently each year. ... ,,!.? :t Californians have been torn asunder by emotion filled, . . y:;. ;;. -::, I.'. , , .... . 1 6, complex initiative*. The campaign rhetoric fails to reveal ...... 1.: . .,. ... : . ?,,,'.*,, . 7:. : ". ,. ... .' ,i. to the average citizen the deeper meaning and the vested

econoudc interests of those who place them on the ballot.

We compare Proposition 1 to "bait" advertising which aervea to lure the consumer into the market place where nothing but high coat merchandise awaits him.

The bait offered the over-burdened taxpayer is a so- called ceiling on "certain" spending and a pitiful little return. Nothing will keep the rich taxpayer from sharing . . ... the pitiful little return even more than' the average taxpayer.

The higher cost merchandise awaits the taxpaye? right back in hie own hometown.

Middle income and lower income working ~&lifomiansand the poor bear the heavy burden of taxation'; It is we who carry the weight caused by the excesses of the rich. Propo-. sition 1 does nothing to change or challenge that.

Californians are further being "baited" into giving up a significant part of .their influence on their own elected representatives. ~tHteSenators and Assemblymen, Citrj

Councilmen, members of Boards of Education and Boards of

Supervisors will be forced to try to serve their constituents within standards which they had no real part in setting.

Bee the average voting Californian, of moderate means, really want his elected representative denied the freedom to act in a manner which serves him best? We sincerely doubt that.

Our organization stands ready to support meaningful, sincere tax reform initiated at the legisla tive .level. We abhor government which is little more than a hand-maiden of the

. ,. . rich. We regret Chat this proposition fails to come close'to the standards we believe to;& necessary. ' We therefore oppose, vigorously, Proposition 1 hnd urge each unit of the Asaociition

?... . in California to exert its influence mong its members in the

.. . , ..,. several cornunities to defeat Proposition I .' Canson: It's my belief that the Watts riot was as much a consumer revolt as it was a racial revolt. If you study the McCone Commission report, if you study the map and the burning patterns, a definite design falls in place. Businessmen viewed as exploiters really got it; some did not. I had a lot to do with mobilizing testimony. A friend of mine, Lois Jones--I think Lois is dead now, yes--Lois Davis Jones, conducted a survey. We worked together on that, and the aides helped to do it. Quite clearly, the anger and frustration were targeted towards those businesses that exploited the people, that had the high interest rates, and all of that stuff.

My own feeling is that it was in fact a consumer revolt. I tried to say that whenever I had a chance to say it. If you look: if the people were just angry, they would have burned everything. But they selected. They selected this pawnshop here. They selected this market here. They would hop over here and go three or four blocks and burn this, and burn that. It was a real statement-- whether or not anybody has ever really stated it that way. I'm sure people have. There are few original ideas in this.

But if you really study that, I see it as a rebellion on the part of the people against the economic oppression. Of course, the racial thing always aggravates that. That market right on 103rd Street stood, although it was filthy.

Then, the welfare people and some of the consumer aides had a picket line one time, right around the store. They talked about how the market on 103rd Street, between Central and Beech, was dirty and filthy, and how the Health Department wouldn't do a thing, and how they brought the stale meat from over in West LA and put it over there.

These are all things that I was a part of at that time. As I say, with that kind of involvement, I was involved at the credit union level, at the consumer level, and at the OEO level.

It really was a statement. So that I'm sure that there was a lot of hostility that had been accumulating. So that when Reagan came in, he says, "I will get Helen ."

What's the fellow's name, the senator from down-in the Pasadena area, who came after the FEPC because of their investigation of insurance companies? He ran for lieutenant governor. [John L.] Harmer! Yes. We managed to beat him in a fight where he was going to strip the FEPC of its authority to initiate investigations where they saw just causes. That was the insurance industry pushing that one. We had quite a fight on that one. Canson: So, really that opposition to what Helen stood for, and what she had tried to do, was intense and had been simmering. There had been ambivalence on the part of Democrats, too. She was sort of out there with ambivalent support from even liberals, with some exceptions, Charlle [Charles] Warren was an exception, and I would say Jim [James] Mills, in San Diego.

Sharp: How about Albert Rodda?

Canson: Al was consistent, yes. Al got himself all messed up when he let Allan Robbins--It's such a cruel irony for a decent human being like Al Rodda to be mistaken for Allan Robbins. Right at the time when Allan was being tried for his problems with young women below age.

Sharp: You were talking about Helen Nelson as somewhat of asymbol of the consumer movement getting itself organized.

Canson: It was really as more than a symbol. It was symbolism, yes, but her own commitment to excellence, and her own intellectual brilliance.

Sharp: But also, her position as Consumer Counsel was sort of a focal point for the coalescing of the consumer movement.

Canson: Right.

Sharp: In what I was reading about the CRLA, some of the administration opposition to the CRLA went like this: One of the things wrong with the CRLA is what it has done is to drum up opposition and unrest in local communities. The CRLA has taken on these flamboyant cases. It has gotten the people restless.

It sounds a little similar to what.youlre describing about the consumer effort: that kind of very vague opposition to the administra- tion in Sacramento, this unwritten or unstated opposition to what was happening, or the trend of what was happening. But the CRLA suffered considerably.

In the consumer movement there were people like you and the Consumer Counsel that kept pushing the effort. This California Journal article* mentioned the different legislators that went on the bandwagon and began to support some of these bills--not only less well-known people like Leon Ralph and Bill Greene, but also more well-known people.

*See footnote on p. 37. Canson: Charlie Warren was the martyr for truth in lending. Jack Fenton was the martyr for door to door.

Sharp: For what?

Canson: The door to door selling people. Aluminum siding, Reynolds Aluminum used to bring out. Oh, you're talking about the heavy guns.

Oh, well, I know Sylvia Siegel. Sylvia was in and out of the legislative thing. Sylvia seemed to focus more on the administrative things like the PUC [Public Utilities Commission] and all that kind of stuff.

Oh! What is this woman's name? Florence Bernstein was a lawyer, and got to be friends with the Beneficial Finance guy, who is a handsome white-haired guy. She used to be in the consumer section of the district attorney's office in Los Angeles.

Yvonne [Brathwaite] took a real clobbering on the legislation. I think it was on the collection agencies.

But that is correct. There was a quote in the New York Times or Wall Street Journal, early in the War on Poverty days, by the chairman of the board of U.S. Steel, who went on to say that the opposition to the consumerism in War on Poverty was at the national level. Some of the stuff we went through was incredible. They would try to come to the conferences, and redirect, and all this other kind of stuff.

The chairman of the board of U.S. Steel said that what this consumer business--I'm paraphrasing now. I wish I could find the thing, God knows where it is. But he talked about how this upsets the balance. And those were the days when they were riding in on the poor's coattails.

[The interviewee extended her comments about the consumer business ]

His thesis was too much education of the low income consumer could erode the financial base of business. The shift would be too radical if we were successful in turning things around so that the poor did not pay more.

[Transcript resumes. ] Canson: I did a thing, "The Low Income Consumer, Will He Win or Lose?"* when I was working at the OEO, and we distrib.uted it pretty widely.

He went on, and in effect said, "We've got to have this balance. If all of this fomentation is taking place among these poor people, and they are understanding the economic system, and they are understanding--" These are not all his words, but this is what that conveyed. "If they are understanding why they pay more, and what are the alternatives, it upsets the balance."

Helen recognized the importance of the relationship of consumer education and consumer action to winning the War on Poverty. National business and other businesses knew that she recognized it and would support that concept.

Sharp: That's a perspective on theReagan administration that we don't have anywhere else, so it's certainly filling in a big gap.

Canson: Well, I'm glad for the chance to put it out there.

Sharp: The whole concept of the War on Poverty is a real interesting one. Why there had to be one, how it worked out in California, and what came--.

Canson: There are some cynics who say that it was a deliberate thing to neutralize the rest. It came in that riot period, and a lot of people got quieted down by reason of it. I think that we found ourselves. I think it was a challenge to some liberal wings as, well, I think that there were some places that the liberals weren't willing to go.

My experience is that the consumer economics part of the fight for poor people has never been a part of the consciousness of the liberal movement. Fair housing they can understand; equal educational opportunities to a degree (if it doesn't mean too many little black kids in their neighborhood), they can understand; Consumers' Union, to a degree--but even that was middle and upper middle class.

Consumers' Union got a grant to develop new supplementary material because they were sensitive to the fact that we had the finance companies writing the tests for this and that, and all this other kind of stuff. There weren't a lot of people to get out there

*Unpublished pamphlet, distributed through the state OEO.

1 Canson: on that cutting edge, to recognize that really the more resources we put at the level of the low-income consumer, the more long-term gain we could make.

We were used to, "Oh, yes, increase the welfare. Oh, yes, do this, and oh, yes, do that .I1

Two Sides of the Same Issue: Affirmative Action and Desegregation in California

Sharp: I did have one more question, and that's about Nathaniel Colley. If you could give me a little more background on him, because his name shows up in all this stuff. I saw his name as being on the State Board of Education, and then as the attorney for the NAACP, especially in his filing in the federal district court lawsuit--the big suit against wholesale discrimination--*

Canson: The omnibus lawsuit. It was going to end all things. An absolutely complex lawsuit that we would need lots of resources to put the pastings and bolts to deal with.

Sharp: Maybe you could just tell me a little bit about Colley, and the suit, and why it came in '71.

Canson: Well, let me back up to Tuskegee with Colley . He's from a little place in Alabama: Snow Hill, Alabama. His wife, Geraldine Jackson Colley, grew up in Sacramento, as did my husband. I grew up in Oklahoma. Some way, we connected at Tuskegee. At the mealtimes, Colley sat at my husband's right. Mrs. Colley sat at my husband's left. I sat at Nat's left, and Nat sat at the head of the table, along with other people, some of whom have become doctors and other kinds of things. I go all the way back there.

He was always a scholar. He worked for George Washington Carver. He was a chemist, and we all knew that he was going to grow up and be the second George Washington Carver. Those were some rich days. He often talks about how Mr. Carver would used to say, "Young man!" [imitating in a high voice] (He had a very high voice.) "You will not be a scientist. You talk too much.''

*See "State Reports on Minority Hiring Record, Outlines Affirmative Action Program," California Journal, May 1972, p. 149. Canson: Of course, Nat went away. Clarence and I got married in '40. We didn't go back to Tuskegee. And Nat went away. He and Gerry got married a year or so later, He went to the service, and found himself continually defending service persons who were having problems. He then came back and enrolled in law school at Yale, and got his degree. He finished with honors and all that. He came to Sacramento, and the first case he took was against the police department, for its abuse, of blacks.

He likes to tell the story of how the State of California denied him an opportunity to be a lawyer "one," a very low grade. Here he had hisdegree from Yale, with honors. Anyway, he went to work in a bookbindhg department of state government.

He has always been active with the NAACP over many, many years. He has participated in a lot of things,

One, a challenge to discrimination in public housing, a challenge to FHA [Federal Housing Administration] funding of housing. On the State Board of Education, one of the exciting things that we recall was when Max Rafferty and the right-wingers had decided they were coming after Land of the Free, the high school history textbook, because they didn't want to have that adopted by the state board. It was in Los Angeles. What Nat decided as a stategy was to take the offensive .

So, he did in fact do that. He sat down, and the offensive took this form: that indeed it was time that we straightened up the textbooks. We had been teaching our kids about how great Robert E. Lee was, when he really was a traitor, he turned on the union. That kind of thing.

In the area of education, he did a lot of things. When Rafferty arbitrarily tried to rescind desegregation guidelines, we filed a lawsuit. A very sensitive person, on the national board of the NAACP. He likes to do things that have a systemic impact, so reasoned that because of Proposition 14 -- /I /I --in housing and employment. The utilization of the initiative. The Wakefield stuff, which came through the Proposition 21, this was evidence of there being a conspiracy to deny black people on these critical fronts. Rather than our piecemealing ourselves to death-- a lawsuit here, a lawsuit there in San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Fresno, and all--we would just go after it all at one time. Canson: It was a massive lawsuit, and it was beyond our resources to follow through, but at least it put out there the concept that there was major evidence of conspiratorial action on the part of several entities, public and private, to deny black people their civil rights. I've got scads of stuff here in the office on it if you want to really go into it, but that's basically it.

He is a very successful lawyer. He is a lawyer's lawyer. He teaches at the University of the Pacific law school in Sacramento. He does a lot of lecturing. He sits on at least one foundation board that I know of, and chairs the Special Contributions Fund Board of the NAACP. That's like our tax-exempt arm of the association.

Sharp: I know that Wilson Riles considers Nat Colley, if not an actual mentor, someone who was there for him.

Canson: Unfortunately, Wilson did not listen to Nat Colley, Virna Canson, Tom Bradley, Carlton Goodlett, and Dan Collins when he made that terrible vote in terms of admissions criteria. It was a very dramatic point. I don't know if you remember that, when the UC regents were considering increasing admissions standards. It was quite a nasty fight.

Sharp: Late in the seventies? There's a note in Dr. Riles's oral history* about it, and he's still very sensitive. He remembers it very clearly.

Canson: Of course he remembers it. He should have, he was the deciding vote.

Sharp: Not the way he tells it, though. He remembers being severely criticized for--.

Canson: He and I had a nasty public confrontation. I wrote how I felt, and I sent it to a whole lot of folks, the New York Times people, and all like that, because he had failed us. He failed us. I was talking with someone in education, who was saying, really, that was the beginning of the decline in minority enrollment at the University of California. Following that, thousands of young people, black young people, had been affected by that. Within a year's time.

There were so many people who he ought to have respected who were begging him not to do that.

*Wilson C . Riles, "No Adversary Situations": Public School Education in California and 'Wilson C. Riles, Superintendent of Public Instruction, 1970-1982, an oral history interview conducted 1981-1982, Regional Oral History Off ice, The Bancrof t Library, University of California at Berkeley, 1984. Sharp : Why did he do it?

Canson : I don't know. I pleaded with Wilson. I called him aside. Jerry Brown--well, it's a long story. That was wrong, That was a mistake, and I guess he thought what he was doing was correct, but the harm was devastating. Yes, many of us were upset, Many people, the last time he ran, did not vote for him on account of that. They remembered very well, particularly the blacks in higher education.

Sharp : Who were wanting to see young blacks come?

Cans on : Oh, sure.

Sharp : Would you say that his decisions to go that way on admissions at UC, that that was fairly characteristic of his approach to affirmative action and more opportunity for blacks, or--

Canson: I think I have moved past the bitterness of it, and so I believe I can respond candidly, which may sound bitter, but there were just too many contradictions to have that be an objective decision.

One, he had plugged into the state system in the comp [ensatory] ed [ucation] field. Marion Joseph, who, I think, had more to do with his attitudes than he had himself, was a close ally. If that's really your belief, then why is it that the system comp. ed. was acceptable? The whole thrust of comp. ed. was affirmative and remedial kinds of things. One or two of his kids went to college under special admissions programs. There's that contradiction.

Sharp : Tolisten to his oral history, and how he explains it, there is no contradiction, because what he says is that blacks don't want special treatment. They don't want two tracks, essentially, they want one main track that--.

Canson : We didn't want two. As a matter of fact, it was not our idea to come over here in the first place. We didn't want two tracks when special action was used to deny us. So, you can't take that position that we all start from the same point. You know, "All bets are off, and let's go.''

I understand, psychologically, how Wilson could do that. He had to do it to live in the environment that he was living in. He wanted desperately to do that. There was a major influence of whites in his growing up. He had associated progress with association with whites, so I understand that, but--.

[interruption] Canson: Okay, So, psychologically, he believed that. He lived in the home of a white person, in Flagstaff, Arizona. He had to try to survive in a racist place like Arizona, so there are some things that you do.

But if that's the reality for you, you can't make it the reality for everybody else. You really can't help people if you don't try to help them to understand that all bets aren't off, and we are -not starting at the same place. It's ridiculous, and why do you have to stand there?

You've got a Billy [William] Coblentz, and you've got Jerry Brown, and you've got all those people, and people that have helped him in his campaign, urging him to vote with them. Dan Collins. When he was on the board [of Education], when Wilson's liberal friends were trying to chew him alive, Dan Collins saved his behind. So, how do you stand up to him? You try to be big, brave, a stronger-than- thou type. It's ridiculous.

I am referring to a period when there were some persons inside the Department of Education who were chipping away at the Bureau of Compensatory Education, Wilson's first base in the Department of Education.

We are friends. We talk. He has been to my home. But this was one thing where we really had some serious, serious confrontations. But I don't have the same psychological needs to live with the same fantasies.

Sharp: Certainly, your experience has been really different.

Canson: I haven't had to accommodate to a lot of people who were hanging on to me, from a lot of liberals. I have not run for public office. I have not had to make accommodations. I understand his having to do that. I understand a lot of the factors around him. I understand the control. I understand the role of a Marion Joseph. I understand all those things, but don't transfer it over to me, and what I'm supposed to do, because it just doesn't work.

The idea is that if your act causes that many thousands of kids to not have an opportunity, then you have to weigh that. I would be a sort of aborted advocate if in fact I agreed with that. I don't agree with his logic, I understand it, but I don't agree with it. It's the kind of thing you have to fight. We are in a major psychological era of warfare right now. Canson: Bakke was a devastating experience.* Thank God we were together on that one--at least Coblentz, and others--on the matter of the university's appeals. But that was a statement, That was really a statement. The statement was that we will orchestrate this thing to a point where you focus, and have a guilt feeling about sixteen spots at the University of California at Davis, and we won't even talk about etghty-four--that's no man's land. That's where all the white folks are going to go, and that's sacred territory.

One of the things that I thank God for my parents for, they, both being educated, understood psychology. They understood what you have to impart to your kids. You hear these things, but you don't internalize them. If you internalize them, you don't have the will to fight anything.

Sharp: You mean like thinking that you're inferior?

Canson: Indeed! If you internalize that.

[Allan] Bakke had a right to challenge sixteen spots, and not challenge eighty-four. What about the whole business of the process of how you get into the university, how fair is that? What about age discrimination? What about all of these other kinds of things? But it's like a magnet, it draws you into the arena where your opposition is, and you can get ground to a pulp. But Wilson didn't have my momma and daddy to tell him that. So I understand that, but I bitterly oppose what he did. And will always oppose it.

Sharp: Certainly, his position is a very complex one.

Canson: Oh, it is. It's an interesting study. I think that I've tried to talk to some psychologists around here, so some of us feel better about it. All of their professional skills just go out. To hell with it, you know?

*In 1976 Allan Bakke challenged the admissions policies of the UC Davis medical school which used a quota system to hold 16 percent of the total number of admissions for persons of minority backgrounds. Although Bakke won at the local level, in the California Supreme Court and in the U.S. Supreme Court, and such use of a specific quota was forbidden, the highest court allowed that an applicant's race and ethnicity could be considered in the admissions process. Sharp: Their judgment is to--.

Canson: Yes, yes. There was more bitterness, I would think, at the level of the black Ph .D. Just really, really bitter, It is interesting, It's an interesting study. It's a very interesting study.

Sharp: Well, I don't want to keep you very much longer. I appreciate your the and--

Canson: I know I'm difficult. [laughs]

Sharp: No. Well, you answered most of the questions that I wanted--

Canson: You have got to look.

Sharp: I did.

Canson: Believe it. You mentioned something about the Bagley bill, and all that goodness. Here's the file on that, the stuff here.

[The interviewer asked Mrs. Canson to describe her role in the support and passage of AB 724 and AB 725 in 1971. Her comments follow; text of the bills is on pp. 51a-c.]

The State Board of Education adopted some regulation in or about 1970-71. They adopted them at their meeting in San Diego. We testified in support of the regulations.

I do not remember the specific forces which were generated to get these regulations introduced into law. The Bagley bills were the results of the push to get the regulations adopted into law.

There were mixed feelings in the pro-integration camps. At that time a group known as the Task Force for School Integration was active.

NAACP supported the measures. They were adopted by the legislature.

Floyd Wakefield, a conservative assemblyman from, I believe , South Gate, was SUCC~SS~U~in getting an initiative on the ballot to rescind these. I believe that was Proposition 21,

NAACP joined in legal action to get Proposition 21 declared unconstitutional.

[Transcript resumes.] /I # Assembly Bill No. 724'

CHAPTER,1765 An act to add Sections 5002 and 5003 to the Education Codc, relating to pupil enrollment.

[Approved by Governor December 16. 1971. Filed rlth Secretary of Slate December 16, 1971.1 The people of thc State of California. do enact as foUows:

SECTION1. Section 5002 is added to the Education Code, to read: 5002. It is the declared policy of the Legislature that per- sons or agellcies responsible for the establishment of school attendance centers or the assignnlent of pupils thereto shall. prevent and eliminate racial and ethnic imbalance in pupil enrollment. The prevention and elimination of such imbalance shall be given high priority in all decisions relating to school sites, school attendance areas, and school attendance practices. SEC.2. Section 5003 is added to the Education Code, to read : 5003. (a) In carryii~gout the policy of Section 5002, con- sideration sliall bc given to the following factors: . (1) A comparison of the numbers and percentages of pupils of each racial and etlinic group ill the district tvith their num- bers and percentages in ench school and each grade. (2) A compnrison of tllr numbers and percentages of pupils of each racial and ethnic group ill certain schools with those in other whools in adjacent nreas of the district. (3) Trends and rates of population change among racial and ethnic groups within the total district, in each school, and in each grade. (4) The effects on the racial and ethnic composition of each school and each grade of alterllate plans for selectin,0 or en- larging school sites, or for establishing or altering school at- tendiince areas and school attendance practicrs. (b) Thc governing board of each school district shall peri- odically, at such tiln~~nd in sucll form as the Department of Educiltion sl~i~llprescribe, submit statistics sufficient to enable a determination to bc made of the numbers md percentages of the various racial and ethnic groups in every public school ul~drrthe jurisdiction of each such gover~lillgboard. (c) For pul.poses of Sectioll 5002 and this section, a racial or et1111ici~nbaliil~cc is indicated in a school if the percentage of p~~pilsof one or more racial or etllnic groups differs sig- nificantly from the districtwide percentage. (d) A district. shall study and consider plans ~\-hicl~would rcsnlt i11 nltcrnatire pupil distributions which would remedy sucl~an ili1bill;lllce upon il finding by the Department of Educa- tion tililt. the pcrcentagc. of pupils of one or more racial or cathnic groups in ;I school differs significantly from the district- wide p~rccnti~ge.A district undertaking such u study may consiclcr anioiig feasibility factors tlie following: (I) Tr;~ditionalfactors used in site selection, boundary de- termini11ion, and school orgailizat ion by grade level. (2) Tile factors mentioned in subdivision (a) of this sec- t ion. (3) Thr high priority established in Section 5002. (4) Tlie effect of suc.11 alternati~eplans on the educiltio,nal progritlns in that district. In considering such alterliatirp plans the district shall ana- lyze tlic total educiltioniil impact of sucli pl;ins on the pupils of the district. Rvpclrts of such ;I district study and resulting plans of avtic~i~,wit11 sc.liedules for i~llple~iiei~tarion,shall be sub- mitted to the Dcpartnient of Education, for its acceptance or rej~ction,tit such tiine and i11 such form as the departlnent sh;~llprescribe. The depi~i.tmen?sh;ill dcterminc the adequacy of nlterniiti~edistrict p1;ins and implcn~entotionschedules and shill1 report its findinqs as to the adeqnacg of alternative dis- trict p1;11isa11t1 iinplcii~c~ntation sclierliilcs to tlie State Board of Eclucntion. A sumni;iry report of tlie findings of the depart- lncil t j)ursuaiit to this sectiou shall be subn~ittedto the Legisla- ture each year.

((3) Tlle State Board of Education sl~allirdopt rules and regulations to carry ont tlie intent of Srction 5002 aind this sect ion. Assembly Bill No. 726

CHAPTER. 1766 An ad rchiing to the Department of Education.

[Approved by Governor December 16 1971. Flled with Secretary of State December i6, 1971.1 The people of the State of Californiu do enact as follows:

SEC~ION1. For the purpose of assisting school districts in carrying out the policy of Section 5002 of the Education Code as specified in Section 5003 af the Education Code during the 1971-1952 fiscal year, the Department of Education shall utilize federal funds to the extent that such funds are, or be- come, a~ailablefor such purposes. Canson: I remember the time when we met with Reagan in his conference room where he had a sort of a newborn baby look, glow. And 'the jelly beans-- [laughs] I can't remember what we talked about that day, but you could tell when you had gotten to him, because he flinched. You had to do him like you need to manage me. If you didn't watch it, he would nod off. Jerry Brown would do that same thing, too, if you didn't watch it. I don't think he would do it intentionally, you would just start to talk, and he would just go. It was interesting.

Sharp: But he had these pictures, you said earlier.

Canson: Oh, all over the place. Scads of pictures. The contrast between the way that office looked when he was governor, and the way it looked when Jerry Brown [Edmund G. Brown, Jr.] was governor, was stark.

Sharp: How did it look when Jerry Brown was governor?

Canson: Plain. He had one simple little desk here, few things that I remember, if anything at all. He had a bench, a love-seat kind of thing, straight up, sitting along the window. Very uncluttered. You walk through the door, though, into the office that was the conference room, and his other things were utter chaos. People running all over the place.

But all these pictures. It reminded me of the time when I went to the Ghanan Embassy. I was in New York, I was invited to a thing there. The statues, pictures, carvings, by Nkrumah were everywhere. What a statement.

Sharp: I hadn't heard that before. The pictures referred to that I have seen show a lot of very dark, heavy wood. The chairs probably weighed fifty pounds apiece.

Canson: I think Nancy [Reagan] pretty well ran everything in terms of decoration and putting stuff up. There were rumors of how she went down and pulled a bunch of stuff out of the basement. I think they were stored in the basement. This was before the restoration of the state capitol. She pulled out pictures, and was hanging this, and a whole bunch of stuff like that. So whether or not that was his taste or hers, the point is that the poor man was living with it. Any time that he wanted to see himself in a picture, all he had to do was just look around.

[End of Interview]

Transcriber: David Pollock Final Typist: Anne Schofield TAPE GUIDE -- Virna M. Canson

Interview 1: December 18, 1984 tape 1, side A tape 1, side B tape 2, side A tape 2, side B tape 3, side A tape 3, side B INDEX--Virna M. Canson

agribusiness, 21 California Committee for Fair Prac- Agriculture, Department of, 21 tices, 27 Air California, 24 California Credit Union League, 22 American Civil Liberties Union, 28 Campbe 11 Soup Co ., 13 Anderson, Iverna, 18 Canson, Clarence, 8-12, 15-18 appointments, to office, 24, 31-32, Canson, Faythe, 17-18 35 Central Valley, 21 civil rights, court cases, 45-47, 50, 51 Bakke, Allan, 50n. Coblenz, William, 49, 50 Bakke case, 47-50 Colley, Nathaniel, 13, 28, 45-57 Badham, Bob, 28 Collins, Dan, 49 ballot measures, community action programs, 19, 21 equal educational opportunity, 46 Connnunity Service Organization, 24 fair housing (prop. 14, 19641, conservatives, 3, 24, 32, 33, 46 27-29 Consumer Affairs, Department of, 35 tax limitation (Prop. 1, 19731, consumer counsel, 42 37-40 advisory council, 19, 35 Barr, Ruth, 2 Consumer movement, programs, 19-22, Bay Area Neighborhood Development 26, 34-38, 41-45 Group, 21 Consumer's Union, 44 Becker, William, 23-24 cooperative movement, 21 Bell, Theron J., 25 credit unions, 13, 15, 18-19, 21-22 black Americans, 2, passim Brathwaite (Burke), Yvonne, 43 Braxton, Ann, 15 Danforth, Art, 21 Breuners (~ohnBreuner Co.), 13 Democratic party, Democrats, 31-32, Brown, Edmund G., Jr. .(~erry), 29 42 49, 52 Deukmejian, George, 29 Brown, Edmund G., Sr. (Pat), 19, 23 Dinkins, Mary, 24 Burnstein, Florence, 43 Dobson, Richard, 16-17 business, Dobson, Eula Gross, 5-8 and government, 36-37, 43-44 Dobson, William A., 6-7 and minorfties, 13-15, 19, 24 29, 41 buying clubs, 19, 21, 24 Economic Opportunity, Office of, 20-26, 37 education, and minorities, 2-4, 13- California Advisory Board on Voca- 15, 17-18, 47-51 . tional and Technical Education, Education, Department of, 46, 49. 14 Board, 31 California Association of Consumers, employment, of minorities, 13-18, 19 20, 29, 46 Fair Employment Practices Comnis- Mattocks, D. D., 13, 15 sion, 27-28, 33, 41 McClain, Wade, 22 Fenton, Jack, 43 McClellan Air Force Base, 15-17 Flournoy. James, 24 McCone Commission (Watts riots), Free Speech Movement, 3 38, 41 McGeorge School of Law, 17 Meaney, ,Paul, 32 governor, of £ice of (~onaldReagan), media, 30-31

3, 24, 29-30 ' Meese, Edwin, 111, 30, 33, 34 governor, office of (pat Brown), 22- Michaels, Jay, 38 23 Mills, Loren, 28 multiservice centers, 22-24

Hall, Mary, 21 Hampton, Claudia, 2 National Association for the Harmer, John, 41 Advancement of Colored People, homosexuality, 31 (NAACP 1, Horn, Verne, 24 consumer coalition, 34-37 Hunters Point, 21 credit union, 13, 15, 17, 19 litigation, 45-47,.51 western region, 19, 27-29 Jackson, Grandvel, 2 youth council, 18 Johnson, James E., 24 Nelson, Helen, 19, 25, 34-36, 42, Jones, Opal, 22-23 44 Joseph, Marian, 48, 49 Nofziger, Franklin C. (~yn), 30 Justice Department, U.S., '33

Order of the Eastern Star, 16 Kennard, Georg, 28 OIRourke, Paul, 20, 22, 24, 25 Keyes, Robert J., 24-26, 29-30

Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Co., labor unions, 13, 29 13-15, 20 . Lawson, Melvin, 18 Parker, William H., 24 le islature le islation, 27-29 Post, A. Alan, 38 53, 35, 32, 45-43, 51 poverty (anti-) programs, 19-21 liberals, 42, 44, 49 Prince Hall Masons, 16 lobbying, lobbyists, 27 Los Angeles, Neighborhood Adult Participation race relations, Project, 22-23, 38 and education, 2-4, 13-15, 17-18, police, 24 47-51 schools in, 3 and employment, 13, 32-33. 46 see also Watts riots and housing, 25, 27, 29 Low Income Family Economics (LIFE), and religion, 12, 27, 28 19 s,ee also NAACP Rafferty,.i.-- Max, 46 Reagan, Nancy, 31, 52 Reagan, Ronald Wakefield (~loyd)Amendment, 46, campaigns, 25 5 1 as governor, 24-26, 28-31, 52 War on Poverty, 43-44 and consumer movement, 33-36 California programs, 19-20, 22- Reese, Jimmy, 22-24 24, 37-38 religion, and race relations, 12, Warren, Charles, 42, 43 27, 28 Watts riots (1965), 22-24, 38, 41 Republican party, Republicans, 34 Watts United-Credit Union, 22 Reynolds, Nancy Clark, 30-31 Whitaker and Baxter Co., 38 Riles, Wilson C., Sr., 47-50 ' White, Clifton, 18 Rios, Tony, 24 Williams, Franklin H., 19 Rodda, Al, 42 Wilson, Kirke, 24 Roosevelt, James, 18 women Rumford Fair Housing Act, 25, 27-29 in government, 19-25, 34-36 Woodruff, Chuck, 13, 20 Woods, Marion, 20 Sacramento, black community in, 11- World War 11, and minorities, 16, 18, 45-46 . 46 Safeway Stores, 13 Samuels, Bruce, 36 Sawell, Thomas, 3 Yorty, Sam, 23 Sherriffs, Alex C., 2-3, 30 youth, counseling of, 13-15 Siegel, Sylvia, 43 state employees, 18, 46 tax limitation, (Prop. 1, 1973), 37-40 Taylor, Hugh, 24 Tuskegee Institute, 8-10, 45

Uhler, Lewis* 37 University of California, Agricultural Extension, 21 minority admissions, 47-51 University of California, Berkeley, 3 University of California, Davis, 21, 47-51

Vandergrift, Lucian, 32 Vasconcellos, John, 2-3 Vocational and Technical Educa- tion Advisory Council, 14 vocational education, 13-15 voluntary organizations volunteers, 12, 16, 19, 27

Regional Oral History Office University of California The Bancrof t Library Berkeley , California

Government History Documentation Pr oj ect Ronald Reagan Gubernatorial Era

Mar gar ete Connolly

SPEAKING OUT FOR RETARDED CITIZENS

An Interview Conducted by Julie Shearer in 1984

Copyright @ 1987 by the Regents of the University of California

TABLE OF CONTENTS -- Margarete Connolly

INTERVIEW HISTORY i

BRIEF BIOGRAPHY iii

I FAMILY AND BACKGROUND

I1 THE FOUNDING OF AID RETARDED CITIZENS [ARC] Early Programs Summer Camp at Enchanted Hills Earl warren's Efforts for the Mentally Retarded Working with the Press

111 LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY Allies in the Legislature Including Mentally Retarded in Short-Doyle Legislation Developing Training for Appropriate So cia1 Behavior More Legislative Supporters Attempts at Comprehensive Planning

IV THE REAGAN ADMINISTRATION AND MENTAL RETARDATION Agency Reorganization in Health and Welfare Governor Reagan's Actions on Mental Retardation State Hospital Conditions Gunnar Dybwad Study of Sonoma State Hospital Role of Parent Associations San Francisco County Mental Hospital Advisory Board Redefining Rehabilitation

V REGIONAL CENTERS The Question of Accountability Cooperation and Competition Among Client Groups

VI RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PREVENTION AND TREATMENT

TAPE GUIDE

INDEX

INTERVIEW HISTORY

The birth of Margarete Connolly's third child in 1951 determined largely how she would spend the next thirty-f ive years. Anne was born with Downs syndrome, which left her seriously retarded and her parents facing the prospect of providing 24-hour-a-day care for the foreseeable future. About the time that Anne was diagnosed, Mrs. Connolly read of a meeting of parents of retarded children at the San Francisco Department of Health. She attended that meeting and shared what she had learned concerning the options for their children.

The prospects were bleak. At that time, San Francisco had one of the few public school programs open to educable mentally retarded children. But there was no preschool program, nothing after school, and "nothing in the summer at all. No summer camps would accept retarded people. There were no playground programs or anything of this sort, so that during the summer, parents had to provide 24-hour-a-day care. There were no workshops, no activity center--nothing." For retarded children advanced enough to be included in the public school program, their 18th birthday was the end of the line. After that, there was only custodial care in the state hospital. A visit to Sonoma State Hospital convinced her that this was an unacceptable solution.

[Tlhe odor would knock you down, just going into the place. . . the kids had to crawl over beds to get to their own beds. . . there was no space between the beds at all. The youngsters had no personal belongings at all--no toy, no book, no nothing--because there was no place to store anything. . . . The toilets had no doors on the stalls and no seats on the toilets. They were given a bowl of gruel three times a day. . . . As a result, their teeth were falling out. Most of them wore a kind of garment made at San Quentin, with nothing under it. The place was incredible, just incredible.

That meeting in 1951 turned out to be the founding meeting of Aid Retarded Children (ARC), later the Association for Retarded Citizens. The handful of parents incorporated, and immediately the fledgling organization started a preschool program for the very young children, playground programs for the older children, and a sheltered workshop for the young adults. Mrs. Connolly, a f~rmerradio actress and girl Friday in the fish and game department at the San Francisco Chronicle, took on the job of coordinator and fund raiser "because we couldn't find anyone else who wanted the job." She went back to UC Berkeley to take courses in the School of Social Welfare from Gertrude Wilson, thinking of her posit ion as "a stopgap."

The stopgap lasted twenty-two years. Her role as advocate for the mentally retarded and ARC administrator covered the administrations of Governors Earl Warren, Goodwin Knight, Edmund G. Brown, Sr . , and Ronald Reagan and involved her in the development and passage of landmark Short-Doyle legislation. With Margarete Connolly as executive director, ARC grew into a full service organization, eventually serving several hundred developmentally disabled men and women each year with residential group homes, recreational programs and volunteer work, advocacy and public education, job training and paid work, and support services to clients and their families. Before Mrs. Connolly retired in 1975, the Day Activities and Senior Services Program was renamed the Margarete Connolly Education Center .*

In the oral history that follows, Mrs. Connolly recounts the trials and triumphs of those years. She describes Earl Warren's efforts on behalf of the mentally retarded , legislation passd during the '30s and '60s, Ronald Reagan's curious support for legislation for the mentally retarded at a time he was cutting $20 million from the mental health budget, and the impact on the mentally retarded of the closing of the mental hospitals.

Mrs. Connolly was interviewed on November 29, 1984 at the spacious offices of Levi Strauss & Company, a long-time corporate supporter of ARC. Mrs. Connolly came to the interview supplied with a deck of note cards--perhaps the habit of an experienced legislative witness--but she consulted them only to check dates when pressed by the interviewer. Her manner was in£ormal, and her wit dry and understated. She used the words "curious," "interesting," or 9 I funny" often to describe actions or events that must have tried her patience and her optimism s ev erely .

The lightly edited transcript was sent to her for review. in April of 1985. In the eighteen months that followed, Mrs. Connolly underwent hip replacement surgery, and a near second surgery, and her husband, Will, suffered a stroke. A gas leak that went undetected for some months slowed her husband's recovery and mysteriously sapped the energy of everyone in the household until it was discovered by accident. In June of 1986, in response to reminders from the interviewer,. Mrs. Connolly confessed that she had been using what strength she had left after caring for her husband to help draft legislation for AB 3637 (Willie Brown) which would mandate testing for all children suspected of being at risk of mental illness. At the time, she explained, parents of severely disturbed children had to declare themselves unfit parents and, thus, cause their children to become wards of the court (including their normal children) in order to receive any state treatment. The testing program was a necessary first step, she explained, to determine the number of children in need of such services. In September of 1986 she called to say that Governor Deuhejian had signed the bill and that San Francisco had found twice as many children in need of services as projected. She also reported that she had almost finished reviewing the interview. The transcript, with portions care- fully clarified and dates verified, was returned on November 27 after which it was retyped in final form, indexed, printed and bound.

"Combined with the Adult Development Program in 1986 under the name Community Training Programs . iii

Apparently, the heaviest burdens fall upon the shoulders of those with the strength and courage to bear them. Just before publication, the inter- viewer learned from Mrs. Connolly that her husband was battling cancer as well as the after effects of the stroke. She was deeply concerned about her ability to care for him and worried about the future for Anne. There was nothing humorous in the conversation but the current of wry optimism so evident in the interview was unmistakable, even over the telephone. It was strongly reminiscent of her views on work to make life more productive and satisfying for the mentally retarded.

We've come a long way, but we have a tremendous amount to do. One of the things that intrigues me about it is that the more we do for mentally retarded people, the more we see the need to do for the aged, for physically handicapped, and children in general. If we raise the standards for the mentally retarded children, then maybe we'll raise them for all our kids. . . .

Julie Shearer Interviewer-Editor

14 July 1'987 Regional Oral History Off ice 486 The Bancrof t Library University of California at Berkeley

Regional Oral History Office University of California Room 486 The Bancroft Library iv Berkeley, California 94720

BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

(Please write clearly. Use black ink.)

Your full name Margarete Ames Malone Connolly

Date of birth November 27, 1910 Birthplace Portland, Oregon

Father's full name Martin James Malone

Occupation Marine engineer Birthplace Port land

Mother's full name Theresa O'Rourke Malone

Occupation Secretary Birthplace Portland

Your spouse William Nicholas Connolly

Your children Paul Martin Connolly, William Phillip Connolly,

Anne Mary Connolly

Where did you grow up? Portland, Oakland, San Francisco

Present community San Francisco

Education A. B. in English literature, Holy Names College; courses

in social welfare, University of California, Berkeley

Occupation (s) radio actress, executive secretary, Catholic Theater Guild;

social services administrator, Association for Retarded Citizens

Areas of expertise public relations, news writing, legislative advocacy,

administration (recipient of Kbshland Award for Social Services Administration)

Other interests or activities Democratic Women's Forum, Democratic party

Organizations in which you are active Tired Mothers Club (for 50 years) MARGARETE MALONE CONNOLLY VITA

A.B. Humanities, Holy Names College, Oakland, Ca. 1934 Certificate, Social Work, University of California, Berkeley, 1963 Executive Director, San Francisco Association for Retarded Citizens (formerly Aid Retarded Children) 1951-1975 Member, American delegation World Congress on Rehabilitation, Dublin, Eire, 1969 Consulta~~tU.S. Department Health, Educatio~~and Welfare, Washington, D.C. 1969-71 Vice-chair ma^?, California Advisory Cou~~cil,Department of Rehabilitation, 1956-65 Director, Board of National Associatio~~for Retarded Citizefls, 1954-56 Member, Advisory Commission on Mental Retardation, California State Department of Health, 1967-68 Board Member, National Rehabilitatio~~Association, 1962-;964 Board member, National Association for Sheltered Workshops and Homebound Programs, 1965-67

Recipient: Koshland Award as an outstanding Califor~Iia social agency administrator, 1972 Golden Rule Award, Association for Retarded Citize~~s, Califor~~ia,1968

Phoebe Apperson Hearst Award : a Distinguished Woman of the Bay Area, 1963 Member, San Francisco Mental Health Advisory Board; chair for two years: 1977-1980. Recipient of the annual award of the Northern California Psychiatric Associatio~~,1986 I FATlILY AND BACKGROUND [Date of Interview 1': 29 November, 1984]##

Shearer: I would like to note that this is November 29, 1984, and this is an interview with Margarete Connolly, on the subject of mental retardation and her work in this field on behalf of the Association for Retarded Citizens.

Could you give me a little background first on yourself-- where you were born, your parents, your education, and how you entered the field?

Connolly: I was born in Portland, Oregon. My father [Martin Malone] was a marine engineer and my mother [Theresa] was a frustrated poetess. I went to school at the Holy Names Sisters in Portland, at Saint Mary's Academy, it was then called. When my father came down to California on a job that was meant to be--we thought--short term, I went to the Holy Names Sisters in Oakland, Holy Names College. I have an AB in English and a minor in speech.

I worked in radio for some years and did other miscellaneous jobs. In Los Angeles I worked for the Catholic Theater Guild. I did a lot of the roles, and then I was also kind of an executive secretary to keep it rolling and did the publicity and that sort of thing.

Shearer: By roles do you mean you played the parts?

##This symbol indicates that a tape or segment of a tape has begun or ended. For a guide to the tapes, see page 64. Connolly: Yes, I played the parts, usually the lead. I did a lot of the Irish, you know, the Abbey Theatre plays; mostly comedy, which was really my forte. It was a very interesting time. We were trying to establish a theater that was wholesome family theater and attractive, and so on, that would have the Catholic philosophical vein running through it. And it was the eruption of war and problems in Europe that really terminated our ability to go on. Oh, there were a number of things that happened at the same time.

So, I came back here, and I married Will Connolly, who was a columnist on the San Francisco Chronicle. Our third child, Anne, was born mentally retarded. She had Downs syndrome and she also had the effect of RH negative. I guess because they thought she wasn't going to live, they didn't transfuse her. She had a very bad heart.

The heart has corrected itself and, while she's very, very much mentally retarded, socially she's a pretty capable human being. But I always say to my sons that for what we spent on her education we could have sent them to Harvard a couple of times. But it's paid off, because she really is socially able to function. She has no speech, and she still has about a three-year mental age but, like a bright three year old, she does many things.

Shearer: You have two other sons, and they are the first and second children. What are their names?

Connolly: Paul is a city planner in Redondo Beach, and Will, junior, is a professional singer.

Shearer: Where is that?

Connolly: Well, he sings around here. Just did a stint with the Sacramento Opera, and he's done a lot of Gilbert and Sullivan things. He's done a lot with the West Bay Opera, and oratorios around the Bay Area, and he's done some concerts. And does weddings and funerals and so on.

Shearer: How old is Anne now?

Connolly: She's thirty-three.

Shearer: And your boys are--

Connolly: Oh, forty-two and forty, I guess. That's terrible, isn't it; I can't remember the ages of my sons. [laughs]

Shearer: Well, it sounds as though your interest in theater and the arts has carried over into the next generation. Does Anne enjoy music? Connolly: Music a little bit, but she does some awfully nice paintings. She's done some watercolors, under skillful guidance, of course. She won a blue ribbon at the Sacramento Fair that Mrs. Alan Short sponsors every year in Sacramento. And she's done some really nice things that that program she attends has been able to sell. But other than that she's pretty limited. But she does go to a program every day, which she enjoys.

Shearer: And she's living here in San Francisco?

Connolly: She lives with us, yes, she lives at home.

Shearer: I guess that answers my next question--how you became involved with the mentally retarded.

Connolly: Yes, well, you know, I think Anne was several months old before I got a clear diagnosis, which was utterly ridiculous when it was clear at birth. Everybody was afraid to say what it was all about. I could tell something was wrong, but nobody would come out and say something. Finally the obstetrician told me what he thought and sent me to a doctor at Stanford Hospital when it was here in San Francisco.

That was really funny because later he had a representative on a committee on which I sat for the United Way on mental retardation. And this person reported that what they customarily did was exactly what the doctor had done to me. He saw the baby, and he made a few comments--general comments--and he said, "Well, I'd like to see how she looks in a month or so." I brought her back in a month, and again he said the same thing. This representative explained that if the doctor let the parents bring the baby several times, they got the message themselves, and the doctor didn't have to say anything. Dr. Samuel Susselman from Langley Porter Psychiatric Institute was chairing this committee and he said, "You mean if they don't weep all over your desk and your shirt front then that's a diagnosis?"

So, this was how far back the whole cause was.

Shearer: And this was 1951.

Connolly: Yes. 11 THE FOUNDING OF AID RETARDED CITIZENS [ARC]

Connolly: I read in the paper just about the time that Anne was diagnosed that a group of parents were having a meeting at the San Francisco Health Department, and two of the people in the group who were mentioned in the paper were people I knew. One I'd gone to school with and one I knew through my husband. So, I went to the meeting, which turned out to be the first meeting of what became Aid Retarded Citizens [ARC].

Shearer: Really. Who were the people?

Connolly: Well, there was Rosemary French, who is a retired social worker who was with San Francisco City Mental Health Department. The other one was Helen Herrick, whose husband at that time was on the faculty of the University of San Francisco, and whom I had met through that connection. She was a psychiatric social worker, and she established the first Information Center for Parents of Mentally Retarded Children, and covered the whole state. She was a human dynamo, that woman.

Shearer: When did she establish the center?

Connolly: I don't remember exactly, but it was shortly after ARC was founded.

Shearer: Through her own resources?

Connolly: No, no, there was someone in Sacramento. I really don't know how that got started. Who would have been the Department of Mental Hygiene director? Whoever that was, was interested in- It was 1954.

Shearer: [Looking through papers] Dr. Frank Tallman was--

Connolly: Well, he was gone about '55, yes.

Shearer: Did Dr. Blaine follow him? Connolly: No, Dr. Walter Rappaport, who was appointed by Governor Goodwin Knight. Well, as a matter of fact, when I retired from ARC, just as a joke one day, I sat down and identified nineteen directors of the California State Department of Mental Hygiene that I had worked with, from Tallman on. So in between I think there may have been some other people; I'm not sure. But Dr. Rappaport was primarily there during the Goodwin Knight years. And he was--how do I say this gently--not the most professionally astute person in the world, but a person who had a lot of common sense and listened to the parents. If they wanted something, he said, "Sure, if we can do it, let's do it."

So somebody must have suggested this to him, and he said, "Oh, that's a good idea, let's do that. We'll have an office where you can get information.'' Well, Helen took it very seriously. She travelled from one end of the state to the other and introduced herself to every small group. Helen Herrick left the job at the end of 1957 to take a position on the faculty at San Francisco State University. Edgar Pye took over her job and covered fifty counties. It's interesting how this whole cause kind of just lit up in 1951, all over the United States. Groups that didn't know a thing about each other were formed, all at the same time.

Shearer: But Aid Retarded Citizens was the group that started here, of which you were a founding member?

Connolly: Right. I was a founding member, and then later I did a couple of years volunteer work as a kind of a coordinator and fund raiser. Then we didn't find anyone who really wanted the job.

Unfortunately, in those days, so many of the people in the school system and in social service and otherwise, who worked with the mentally retarded, were the people who had failed in other departments. They were put where it was supposed to be not so challenging and no problem.

We looked at all these people who would be willing to come and work for us, and there wasn't anybody that you'd be interested in. So I kind of drifted into it. I did it first part-time and then I went back to the UC Berkeley School of Social Welfare. Gertrude Wilson had come from the University of Chicago and was giving a wonderful course at Berkeley at night that was aimed only at people who were working for social work agencies. You had to be employed in an agency or some kind of social service program or a playground or whatever. The course was not only technically very good, because she threw a tremendous amount of material at us, but was down to earth. We solved problems every night, and suggested ways to do it. Connolly: I took that for two years, and there were two seminars during the summer of, I think, three weeks each, full time. I felt as if I had a Master of Social Work degree when she got through with us.

Shearer: This was through the School of Social Welfare?

Connolly : Yes.

Shearer: Meantime, how were you keeping your family on an even keel? That was a tremendously disruptive and heartbreaking thing that had happened to you--that Anne was so severely retarded.

Connolly: Well, I went back to my doctor, who felt very, very strongly that I should place Anne. There were questions about whether she was going to live or not, so we did place her in a nursery. In my husband's job, he wrote a column, and he liked to go to work after dinner when there were no phones and no people around, so he was home all day. Then he would sleep, and he'd usually be up around two. So he'd be home for the boys, and give them a snack, and he'd be supervising them until I got back. I was only working part- time. So it worked itself out.

I had a sister-in-law who would stay occasionally if I had to take a trip. Because early on, I was elected to the board of the National Association for Retarded Citizens (Retarded Children, it was then). I felt it was a conflict of interest, and I helped to change the bylaws so that local executives did not sit on the board; I thought that was not a healthy way to go, to have a local executive director on the national board. I felt it should be clear of that kind of involvement. It would have been much better to have gotten one of our board members to be on the national board.

Shearer: Why, exactly?

Connolly: Well, there were a number of things that we voted on that would have affected me directly, if I were a career person, for instance. I didn't think of this as a career. For twenty-two years I was thinking of this as stop-gap. Well, maybe not in the later years. But at that time I wasn't thinking of it as a career. But I thought that if I were a career person, there were things they brought up-- I don't remember exactly what they were now--that I would have fought, and that I would have voted against, and it would -not have been in the best interest of retarded people. I just don't think you can handle that kind of a thing in this kind of a cause very well. Early Programs

Shearer: I want to go back to something you said just a minute ago, about how, all across the country, in 1951 and 1952 these groups concerned with the mentally retarded were springing up. To what do you attribute that development?

Connolly: I don't know. Was it Voltaire who said, "When a cause is right ..." or something about "When an idea's time has come..."? That's the way it seemed to'be. It justseemed to be that people were able and willing to talk about it. I don't know whether it had to do with the war years or what. I really don't know. But they were banding together.

San Francisco was ahead of many communities because we had a public school program for the mentally retarded, one of the first in the United States. Louise Lombard was the director of the old Telegraph Hill Settlement House, as it was called then. She realized these kids coming to the playground were mentally retarded and were not in school. So, smart woman that she was, instead of just starting a class, she went to the Board of Education, and offered them a room, but said they'd better start the class. So they started the class, and I think that was 1910, if my memory is right.

Shearer: So this was funded, then, through the San Francisco Department of Education.

Connolly: Yes, and supported by state funds as well. So it was primarily the PTA [Parent-Teacher Association] of that school* which formed ARC, because they realized they could not do it under the aegis of the PTA.

The school system kept the kids in a program until they were eighteen, but then they headed to Sopoma State Hospital for custodial care. And that, everybody felt, not only in human terms, but in money terms, was a ridiculous situation. Here were kids who had been able to function in the community, and then they were going to a state hospital which at that time had no program. Because there was nothing. In San Francisco and other locales there was no recreation; there was nothing in the summer at all. There were no summer camps that would accept retarded people. There were no playground programs or anything of this sort, so that parents during

*Which later became the Louise Lombard public school in San Francisco and was moved out to Hayes and Pierce Streets. Connolly: the summer had to provide twenty-four-hour-a-day care. After the young people were graduated from Louise Lombard, then the same thing obtained. They had no workshops, no activity centers-- nothing of this sort.

It was interesting that, of the parents who came to that first meeting, there were really three distinct groups. There were people like me, who came with newborn babies or small children, who were concerned about preschool, and nursery care, and various kinds of things. And there were the middle group, who were concerned about recreation, who wanted summer camps, who wanted playground programs, wanted that kind of opportunity. They almost immediately formed into three committees. They each went out and raised some money, and before that year was over, they had three programs on the way.

Shearer: What was the third group?

Connolly: Well, the third group were parents of the older ones, who saw the need for a workshop.

Shearer: As an alternative to the state hospital?

Connolly: Yes, yes. So the group that wanted a preschool--I think each group raised about five hundred dollars. The preschool group went out and started with five hundred dollars. They found a space at Mission Community Center, and went to the school system. Dr. William Goldman was then director of adult education. Before the community college administered the adult education, it was in the Unified School District. And Dr. Goldman said, "Well, we can start a parent education class." So he assigned a parent educator (only she happened to be a child development specialist) full-time to this preschool. She was presumably training the parents to be volunteers. The parents took turns, working in the school, and we got the preschool started.

Shearer: Is this where Anne was then placed, in the preschool?

Connolly: Oh, no, Anne was too young then. She was just an infant. And besides, Anne didn't walk until she was four, so she was in nursery care until she was about four, I guess. Then she went to Santa Barbara to St. Vincent's for a while. That's another story.

Anyhow, the group with older sons and daughters rented a building out on Balboa Street, and started a sheltered workshop. Again, Dr. Goldman sent teachers, because he figured all these young people were adults; they were over eighteen. As far as I am able to find out, that's the first time in the United States a public adult education unit had funded a program for mentally retarded people. Connolly: But he was a very forward looking and direct kind of man, you know. The barrier of the handicapped didn't get in his way. The story of that workshop, one part of it, is so amusing to me. The people, the two educators he sent (and then we had vo.lunteers), one was a wood-working and crafts specialist. He started the young people making some things that looked like nothing. They were really very ugly, misshapen. The clients just weren't capable of the level of what he was asking of them. And then we had a volunteer who had a ceramics class, and I've forgotten what the other thing was.

One of the young men was Mario, who was about nineteen-great big Italian kid whose father was a truck farmer. He used to come to the workshop in a big mackinaw and with a tin lunch pail. He came in one morning and he said to me, "When my father goes to work, he doesn't do fingerpainting." [chuckles]

And we had a staff meeting that afternoon. One of the fathers, who was the chairman, I think, of the workshop committee, came up with an idea. At that time, the San Francisco Flower Mart was on Fifth, near Mission. And it was the largest flower mart in the world at that time. And they used tons and tons and tons of old newspapers to wrap and ship flowers. But they had to be prepared in a particular way. They had to be all the same size sheets, for instance. The Chronicle and the Shopping News used the same size. There was the San Francisco News, and the San Francisco Call Bulletin, and the Wall Street Journal, all different, so they all had to be separated. There could be no single sheets, no slick sheets, no torn sheets, no soiled sheets.

This father built a rack that, when it was filled with the proper kind of paper, came to twenty pounds of newsprint. And then it had to be tied with a rope and a very particular kind of knot (which I never, never learned and which the young people had no trouble with whatsoever). That knot had to be tight for shipping and easy to pull out--very easy to pull out. The interesting thing to me was that every time our supplies began to get low and it was about time for another order, these young people would speed up their work. They'd go back to look at stored supplies. (And these were quite severely retarded people.) They'd look to see if we had enough supplies on hand for when the truck came for pick up.

Another interesting thing was that we got the Lions Clubs-- there were eleven clubs in San Francisco--involved in collecting the old newspapers for us. They got so interested, they began to make donations, and to help us in other ways and become involved in our work. Summer Camp at Enchanted Hills

Connolly: Then the other group started a summer camp. I had been on the board, before Anne was born, of Enchanted Hills, which was the blind camp in Napa. In fact, my husband and I had found the property, just by accident, that they built the camp on. So I called the president of that board and asked if we could use the camp for two weeks during the summer. They said, "Sure, without any fee." And the parents got together and formed a committee and staff, and took some training, sort of, how to run a camp. I think we had one volunteer professional. I know we had no staff that year.

Wonderful George Kerson, who had the Army Surplus store at that time on Market Street, now is in Marin County and is the founder of Vine Village, the residence for mentally retarded adults up in Napa. I called him and said, "George, would you give us a good price on blankets and sleeping bags?" I think we took something like eighteen young people up to camp, and he gave us the whole thing-- blankets, sleeping bags, everything that we might need.

Afterwards, we came back and did an evaluation; we had a year then to plan a little more professionally. We began using the "Y" camp at La Honda, and made a deal with San Francisco State College. They sent graduate-level students with a professor, for the students to learn [by] working with the youngsters and then get a critique at night about how they had done--problems and questions.

Shearer: What a wonderful idea.

Connolly: Yes, it worked for--I think the camp ran about fifteen years. They don't have it now, but--

Shearer: Really, from 1952 to about 1967?

Connolly: Yes, maybe even a little more than that. Yes, I think that's about right.

Shearer: Can you describe a little more particularly the parents with whom you worked? I mean, what was their class, and level of education, and place in the community, and ethnic background, and so forth?

Connolly: Well, the first founding group were Rosemary French, a professional social worker. She was the first president, and her husband, John, was a professor of music at San Francisco City College. They were parents, and she had been in school with me briefly at Holy Names College in Oakland, but she went on to Berkeley then. Helen Hoffman's husband was a very well-known physician here in tom, and she was a well-educated woman. Martin Shiman and his wife were very active. Martin was a realtor in the Richmond @strict, and Clara Shiman was from Vienna, and a very, very charming, able woman. Shearer : You said Helen Herrick the first time around. Is Helen Herrick Helen Hoffman?

Connolly : No, a different person. Helen Herrick was a professional who was working .with the Department of Mental Hygiene. Helen Hoffman was the parent of twin boys and worked very, very hard with us. There was another family--Tarallo. Lou and his wife, Frances. Mrs. Tarallo really worked on the workshop, and went at it in such a way that she really was as good a professional as I have ever seen since in the way she handled the books. From the very first, we paid a very small salary to the young people. Maybe only a few cents a week on the newspapers. But we paid it on a basis of the amount of productivity and coming on time, and all the things that we wanted the young people to learn. One of the young men hurt his eye, and we were sued, and that book that Frances Tarallo kept so carefully proved that we had covered the clients with workman's compensation insurance. That book was so beautifully done, with the salaries, and the time, and everything, that it was admitted in court and there was no problem about it.

Lou Tarallo also was very active. He was a salesman for a pharmaceutical house and very active with a great many clubs and organizations around town. He got them all involved with our program. He was a very outgoing man, and he did a wonderful job.

Maybell Beyer, and her husband, Nicholas Beyer, were in- volved. Nicholas Beyer was the first treasurer of our state ARC. He was an engineer. I've forgotten what kind now--but something to do with electricity.

Shearer: When did this state organization form?

Connolly : In 1952, I think. I know there was a meeting in Modesto, and I went to that meeting. I kept my notes, in fact I still have the program, I guess you'd call it. Mr. Beyer gave a report.

Shearer: At that time, was the organization also called Association for Retarded Children?

Connolly : No, it was called the California Council for Retarded Children.

Shearer: When did the name change from Children to Citizens?

Connol ly: That must have been in the seventies, I think. It was fairly recent. Earl Warren's Efforts for the Mentally Retarded

Connolly: Those first two years, before I really started working for ARC (you know I was doing it on a volunteer basis for two or three years), I served as the legislative chairman for the state association. That's how I got so involved so early, with people like Earl Warren. Well, I had known Earl Warren just slightly when he was district attorney of Alameda County when I was in school.

I can't say I worked directly with him, but he had taken the first positive steps to remedy conditions for the mentally ill in California. Of course, at that time, mental retardation was part of that package. It was considered part of mental health, and it was administered by the Department of Public Hygiene, as they called it at that time. Earl Warren held the first California Governor's Conference in Mental Health that was ever held. That was February 3 and 4 in 1949.

Shearer: I understand that mental retardation, and mental health, in fact, were grouped under the general designation of "Department of Institutions," so the category had mentally ill, corrections, women's prisons, everything, all lumped together.

Connolly: That's right. Anything that was in a building was all together. [laughs] It's interesting to go back and look at that report, which I guess I read when I started working in Sacramento. The conference was on Amelioration and Prevention. They made the point at the conference that in 1851, the first state mental hospital was built in Stockton, California. And when they opened the doors, they had eighty beds and a hundred patients. And they said in 1949 it was exactly the same ratio. They really hadn't made any progress, they had twenty too many patients all the time--or twenty too few beds.

It's very interesting to see the people that Warren pulled together. Dr. Stafford Warren, who was later the federal Mental Health Administrator; Benjamin Bonaparte, who was the director here of Homewood Terrace in San Francisco, and later of the Variety Club Blind Babies Foundation, and who was a superb social worker in my book. He gave me a lot of help when we were getting going with ARC. I went to him for advice and help. Earl Warren also recruited Dr. George Tarjan, who was later the director of the State Department of Mental Health, and now I guess emeritus of the Psychiatric Division of the UCLA Medical School. He was also on John Kennedy's President's Committee on Mental Retardation. Connolly: They laid out a blueprint that was valid for many, many years. They talked about raising hospital standards, which they agreed were an absolute disgrace. They talked about education, housing, rehabilitation, recruitment of staff, education of staff, professional education in general, research, financial aid to families so they could cope at home with problems--that was very far-reaching--day-care centers, day-treatment centers, workshops. They talked about everything that later became part of the stream of programming. They agreed to the principle of community programs, to stop the flow of people to the hospitals. But they did that in a programatic context, not just to save money, which we've been hearing ever since. They said you had to bring the standards up in the hospital, you had to provide a decent environment. At the same time, bring the community programs up so that people will not have to go to state hospitals inappropriately. Earl Warren signed the first bill which permitted permissive education of mentally retarded children in public schools with state reimbursement.

Earl Warren, I think in about 1951, appointed Dr. Frank Tallman from UCLA as director of the Department of Mental Hygiene. He was really a forward-looking man. I think Iread in the paper that the San Francisco Mental Health Association was having a dinner meeting with him right after he was appointed, in a restaurant in Chinatown. So I went, and I think there were only about fifteen people there, so I was at the same table with him. I really pumped him and talked to him at great length about this. It was a great opportunity.

And then, we had another experience. Earl Warren resigned in 1953 as governor because he had been appointed to the Supreme Court. Just before he left, he was asked to speak at the San Francisco Press Club, of which my husband was a member of the board of directors. When Warren got up to speak, he said, in effect, I'm putting aside my prepared speech because someone told me there are two hundred working newsmen in this room today. I have a problem and I'm going to lay it on your shoulders. The one thing, the one big disappointment of my administration as governor is that I have really done very little about the state hospitals and, particularly, the hospitals for the mentally retarded. And I'm going to ask you to keep this in mind, to go look at Sonoma, to look at Agnews--or wherever, I guess they weren't using Agnews then for the mentally retarded but to look at the other hospitals--and to keep the fires lit, so that we do something about it. My husband got a lot of credit for this, but it was as big a surprise for us as anybody. Everyone thought he had said something to the governor. Working with the Press

Connolly: We had been working with.newspaper people. We worked with Carolyn Anspacher, although I always remember the editor of the San Francisco Chronicle telling me that he didn't want to run a story on the mentally retarded because it was such a pathetic cause.

Shearer : This wasn 't Scott Newhall?

Connolly: No, no it wasn't. It was the city editor really, you know--

Shearer: Abe Mellinkoff?

Connolly: Yes, Abe Mellinkoff. But while I was talking to him that day, Jim Benet came over, and just happened to say hello, you know. I told Jim what I was trying to persuade Abe to do, and he said, "Oh, give it to me, Abe, I'll do it .'I Well, he did such a beautiful story that they ran it on the front page Sunday, and of course that got statewide coverage. And then, before that, even, Harry Press, the editor of the San Francisco News had done wonderful stories for us.

Shearer: Oh, the News Call, then--

Connolly: No, it was the News. (You're thinking of Call-Bulletin.) He later went to Stanford University, where he is now. Yes, he did a whole series for a week, with pictures of our preschool and workshop, and camp pictures, and interviews with parents. Just a wonderful man.

Shearer: Did he have a particular connection, or was he just very sympathetic?

Connolly: No, he and my 'husband had worked very closely together at one time. My husband had been on the News before he went to the Chronicle. He just had empathy, that's all.

Benet told me that his roommate in college had a retarded child, and after the man moved out, he and his wife had an apartment nearby, and Jim used to go to the park with him to study and they'd take the baby, and take care of the baby. So he did a very sensitive, very perceptive story, as he would anyhow. And of course, Carolyn Anspacher of the Chronicle I'd known for year.s, and she did some beautiful things, and she was always there when we needed her for a fight. Great woman!

Shearer: Yes, she wrote some very telling articles.

Connolly: Yes, the ones you sent me I'd forgotten about. But she had done things before that, too. Shearer: How did you know her? Because of your husband?

Connolly: Well, I worked on the Chronicle for a little while, too. Right after college, I was kind of a girl Friday for the fish and game editor and the radio editor. You know, I'd have to do those radio schedules. And the fish and game editor, who was a character, really attracted a lot of advertising. He had an office on the second floor with a refrigerator and always some food. It was to attract people when they came into town so they wouldn't go to the Examiner. So Ding Darling, for instance, who had founded Ducks Unlimited, you know, would come to us first partly because we had a refrigerator and we had all the food. And then we'd to out to dinner, something like that. I worked from three till midnight, which were his hours. I occasionally wrote a column, but it was mostly pasted together because I didn't know a thing about hunting or fishing.

Shearer: So you were kind of his foot-person or--

Connolly: Yes, yes. And I'd call and find out when the duck season was open in Mexico, and when the decisions were being made about this, that, and the other thing in Sacramento, just to keep the information flowing.

Shearer: This, I imagine, was a help to you in identifying resources and doing what we now call networking.

Connolly: Oh, yes, yes. It certainly was. And my husband's name got me in a lot of places. Because he had covered Sacramento for the -San Francisco News when James Rolph was governor. He had covered city hall before that, when Rolph was mayor. And then he was assistant to the labor editor for a little while, and he was on the city desk. In fact, when he left the Chronicle, somebody said to me he was the only man left who could put a whole paper together. Because everybody's a specialist today, you know.

His first job was make-up, on the old San Francisco News, so we knew an awful lot of people in politics, and in the newspaper business. That was a tremendous help, to get me in places.

Shearer: Well, I should think to get the story out, too. If you could call Carolyn Anspacher and James Benet, and some of those people--

Connolly : Yes, that 's true.

Shearer: And once the stories are out, too, it seems to me it almost creates news, too. So that it becomes a story that's worthy of coverage.

Connolly: Oh, yes. We didn't ever call them unless there was something worth doing. Unless we had something to offer them. Connolly: Many people don't realize that the story which gets the widest attention is often a "filleru--a bit of factual information about your subject, one or two inches in column length. They are not easy to place these days, but a public relations committee with imagination can do wonders. I11 LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY

Allies in the Legislature

Connolly: While I was going to Sacramento, I got acquainted--and we became very, very close friends--with Assemblywoman Dorothy Donahoe of Bakersfield. She had worked with the Bakersfield ARC, on their board of directors, and had been very interested in the whole subject. She'd had polio as a child, and she had a slight limp. That, with other things, made her very, very sensitive to the needs of handicapped people. She asked for the chair of the Assembly Interim Subcommittee on the Severely I.fentally.Retarded, of the Education Committee. In fact, I guess, she created it. Others on the committee were Donald Doyle of Lafayette, Walter Dahl of Piedmont, and Ernest Geddes of Claremont.

Carlos Bee of Hayward was on that committee, too. I believe that he had a child who had some hearing problems. And then Senator James McBride of Ventura, I don't know what his interest was, because he was a very private man. But he supported everything we wanted, and he was chairman of Senate Committee on Finance, so it made all the difference in the world. But he was a strange man. I used to go and see him, and he'd listen to me, and he 'd say, "Thank you for that information." Never by a glimmer would he let me know how he was going to vote.

But then I watched him very carefully on a couple of occasions when we had really controversial issues (and this happened with short-~o~lelegislation, too). On the last day of the committee's hearings, they always have so much piled up, you know, that they go into extra hours, and frequently go past mid- night. And what he would do was to leave the bills till after midnight, when the people who didn't have the stamina to stay and fight them had gone. And when he'd see them leaving, one at a time, he'd lump those bills together, and after midnight say, "All we've got left is this, this, and this. Do I hear a 'do pass'?" And everybody'd say, "Do pass," and they'd go out, and that was it. No fuss or feathers, and we got what we wanted. But there was no discussion about it. Shearer: Do you recall the particular controversies?

Connolly : Well, I remember a Short-Doyle bill when I was testifying. Literally, an old woman from Pasadena wearing tennis shoes got up after me--I couldn't believe it, but she did. A little old lady. And I think it was Irving Rosenblatt and I who had gotten up to testify before her. She got up right after us and said, "Those people you have just heard testify are sexual perverts." [laughs] Oh dear.

And then there was another lady who got up and testified that she knew what was happening in the state hospitals, that there was a plan in the works to build a big hospital in Alaska. And that we were going to send all the mentally ill people up to that hospital! And our political enemies. [laughs ]

Shearer: I wonder what brings out such outrageous testimony.

Connolly : And such fear of mentally ill people. I don't know. Of course, at so many times during the early days, mental retardation and mental illness were considered synonymous in the public mind.

Our big problem was to try to educate people. You know, you can get a lot of publicity, but people don't read those things unless they're in the market to buy. It's like ads. You don't look at ads unless you're in the market to buy something. So we could have story after story in the paper. (I had this happen to me about fifty times.) A new parent would come to the organization. We had a social worker who would work with them to see what they wanted to do (because sometimes placement in a hospital was appropriate, you know. You had to take account of the whole picture). Then the families would come and say to me, "You've never had one single line in the paper about this." This was after Carolyn Anspacher had covered it extensively, and somebody else covered it, you know. Because they had never read it until that child was born. Then, all of a sudden they became very conscious of it.

Shearer: Selective perception?

Connolly : Right, indeed.

Shearer: What was your title? You were legislative chairman?

Connolly : Well, I was for the first three years, I guess. I was the volunteer legislative chairman of the California Council of Retarded Citizens (CCRC), 1955-57. I was also the executive secretary on a part- time basis of San Francisco Aid to Retarded Children, as it was called then.

Shearer : As part of your duties, you actually travelled to Sacramento to lobby and to testify? Connolly: As part of my volunteer duties, although I didn't do much testifying, because even then I didn't believe a professional in the field is effective--unless it's a technical matter. I did a little bit during the years that I was working as the chairman of that committee. But I had a very strong member of the CCRC Legislative Committee housed in Sacramento. It was the fire chief, who had a retarded child and who could get away, who would run over and testify. So I didn't do a lot of running to Sacramento. I did a lot of phoning and writing. But we had another woman whose daughter is the principal of a Catholic school here in town. The Erbachers--she and her husband both had a lot of time. He had his own business, and they would run over whenever we wanted. Oh, and then the other one was Pat Dunbar, the wife of the assistant director of the Department of Corrections. He later became the director, later the federal chief--Walter Dunbar. Pat knew everybody in the capital through her husband. She was on our committee and took over the chair.

Another thing I did was to identify two people who were bitterly opposed to everything we were doing. One of them was a Mr. Howard Williams, an assemblyman from Modesto, or maybe even further south. Someplace in there. I'll always remember, we tallied votes one night. He was on the Senate Committee on Finance, and we counted votes one night, and we were one vote short. I had appointed a woman from his district on the committee--who was a big giver to his campaign every year. I called her, to tell her our dilemma, and they told me she was in Mexico. Well, they gave me a phone number, so I called her in Mexico, and I said, "You know, we're really desperate. We can't get to Mr. Williams, we can't--"

She said, "Oh, dear, I'm sure he just didn't understand. He didn't hear you. Why, I'll call him right now." And she called him right then, and he voted with us.

Shearer: What was the bill, do you recall?

Connolly: No, it was one of the many. We had many bills. First was permissive education for the so-called educable mentally retarded. Then came permissive education for the trainable mentally retarded. And then mandatory education for the "trainable," and then lowering the age of eligibility because it started at age eight, at first, and then the child-care center.

It may have been the child care center bill, because there was a center in Stockton that had been open during the war for working mothers. It was very good, but the need for child care disappeared at the end of the war. So the director of special education up there, Roger Walton, who was a very good man, opened it up for a day-care center for retarded children. As soon as they could walk, they were Connolly: eligible. So we used that as a model to write the legislation for a development center. Dorothy Donahoe and several legislators went to see it and were impressed. We needed that kind of thing. The John Roberts Center here, in San Francisco, now, is the public school program for mentally retarded children.

Shearer: And the John Roberts school is for day care or is it a development center?

Connolly: Well, it's a development center, but it started really with the idea of day care, and then became a development center, yes, for the more severely handicapped and the younger children. San Francisco ARC demonstrated an ideal that we had and the school system picked it up.

I haven't kept up with the San Francisco schools, so I'm not exactly sure what they're doing in each program. But that was the way it was started.

Shearer: Were the bills that you are describing now, did they precede the Short-Doyle legislation?*

Connolly: Some of them did. Some of them were concurrent and so~eof them were later, yes.

*The Short-Doyle Act of 1957 encouraged counties and cities to initiate or expand mental health services for the mentally disordered in every county through locally controlled and admin- istered programs. It made available funds on the basis of50 percent from the state and50 percent from the county. In 1963 the funding ratio was made 75 percent state funds to 25 percent county. Later ratios were set at 90 percent state funds to 10 percent county for local treatment or a state-imposed quota of patient days spent in a state hospital. Counties were charged full cost of housing county residents in state hospitals beyond the specified quota of patient days. The term "mentally retarded" was included in the 1957 versfon of the Act. Later it was dropped after the Lanterman Mental Retardation Services Act of 1969 provided framework for community care services through comprehensive, coordinated systems of care for the mentally retarded. Including the Mentally Retarded in Short-Doyle Legislation

Shearer: The incident that you recounted where the little old lady in tennis shoes stood up, was that a Short-Doyle legislative hearing?

Connolly: That was Short-Doyle, yes, because Irving Rosenblatt was there. And I had been asked to go on the board of San Francisco Mental Health Association. In the beginning, I thought this was the way of their taking on the cause of mental retardation. And that we could just fade away with ARC, that there wouldn't be a real need to continue separately. Since mental health and mental retardation were together in Sacramento, why not together here?

But after I'd been on the board less than a year, it became very evident that nobody there was the least bit interested in mental retardation. So the best we could do was to get the word "retardation" in the Short-Doyle Act in order to get whatever services in the community might be available. Even if they were only for the emotionally disturbed mentally retarded, or for parents who were upset and who needed counseling and that sort of thing.

Shearer: The board that you were sitting on was the San Francisco Area Board?

Connolly: No, no. San Francisco Mental Health Association board. Long before Area boards were established. And I was trying to get them to take on the cause of mental retardation. But the psychiatrist on the board at that time said, "Oh, mentally retarded people can't conceptualize. And they can't use psychiatry, and there's no point.

Fortunately, Dr. Irving Phillips at Langley Porter and Dr. George Tarjan in LA felt differently, and gradually they really helped to change the whole thinking of the profession. Both of them were very active nationally.

Shearer: At what point did that change begin to manifest itself? You said you went to testify on the Short-Doyle legislation, and that you were not successful, or at least not immediately, in getting the words "mental retardation" included in the Act. Even Dr. Portia Bell Hume, in fact, was opposed.

Connolly: Right. She had done most of the work on the wording of the Act. And I just talked to Senator Alan Short, and said to him, "I'm told that you intend to include mental retardation, but all it says is psychiatric conditions. I don't know anybody who's going to read that as mental retardation." And he said, "You're absolutely right. I don't either .I1 Connolly: He said, "We're going to have a little conference this afternoon, about refining the bill. Come to the conference." So I went to the conference, and that's when Portia said, "Well, anybody would know that that includes mental retardation." And I said, "Dr. Hume, you know, it does to you, and you're correct, but it doesn't mean that to most people in the community.''

So Alan Short just said, "Let's put in mental retardation," and he went on with the meeting. He was a very direct man. He -is a very direct man. And he'd worked very, very hard on that legislation.

Shearer: Do you think that Dr. Hume, in fact, believed that it covered everything? Or was there some hesitation on her part?

Connolly: Both. She really honestly believed it was a psychiatric disorder, in her definition. But there was also a real reluctance to include--and maybe she was right--mental retardation on a mental health act.

[brief discussion of tape-recorder's apparent malfunctioning]

Shearer: I just want to reaffirm that you'll have a chance to look over the transcript and if there's something that seems 'sensitive or would cause pain to somebody you could always delete it or seal it for the time you specify.

Connolly : Good.

One thing I wanted to say about Dorothy Donahoe, I thought it was so interesting that she was the candidate of the California Business and Professional Women in their protest that there were no women in the legislature. They supported a Democrat and a Republican, Dorothy from Bakersfield and a Republican from Los Angeles. The Los Angeles gal didn't make it, but Dorothy did. She got to Sacramento, and then Pauline Davis was elected and they kind of teamed up. They both became furious, because, in the Capitol building, when the assemblymen want to go to the rest room, they can stay there in the rest room as long as they like, and there's a microphone that tells them what's going on on the floor, and they can go back to their desks when they're needed. But Dorothy had to go to another floor to use the rest room, with no microphone, and so she had to stay on the floor of the assembly if she wanted to know what was going on. So she finally raised a clamor--she was conservative, really, fiscally--but she demanded a rest room on the same floor. So they had a grand opening for the ladies rest room off the assembly.

Shearer: [laughing] With a loudspeaker? Connolly: With a loudspeaker. So she and Pauline could go sit down and still hear what was golng on.

DorothyDonahoe's report for her 1955-57 study by the Education Committee's Subcommittee on the Severely Mentally Retarded came out in March, 1957, and laid out legislative proposals in seven major areas: public school programs, state reimbursement to local school districts, advance payments to local districts to begin classes, raising of age to 21 years in school, scholarships for teachers, establishment of the Joint Interim Committee on the Mentally Retarded with funding; and a call for extensive statistical reports.

It is important to note that more than anyone else, I believe, Dorothy Donahoe influenced Frank Lanterman's subsequent activities. His office when he first arrived in Sacramento was next door to that of Ms. Donahoe. While he was fiscally a very conservative Republican, he became intrigued with the meetings (especially after hours) in her office. He also worked long hours and would sometimes join in the discussions.

I firmly believe that '~oroth~Donahoe "converted" him to deep concern for developmentally disabled children.

Shearer: We were talking a little bit about Dr. Hume and her possible reluctance to include the mentally retarded in the Short-Doyle Act. What was the reason? Was there a stigma attached to the--

Connolly: No, I think it was a psychiatric general position that you couldn't cure mental retardation. And that mentally retarded people were not capable of conceptualizing. The literature said that at the time, but that's been disproven since. But I think that was it. She felt that that was not the right place for them. Not what would be most productive.

And, as it turned out, only Contra Costa, San Francisco, and Humbolt Counties ever used that provision to include mentally retarded in the law. We went to work right away, and got quite a bit done in San Francisco under that. In Contra Costa, George Miller, Senior, was chairman of Senate Committee on Finance by the time it was going, and he lived next door to the mental health director of Contra Costa. The senator kept him informed of where he could get some money to do something. The parents were always reminding Miller in Contra Costa, so they had quite a good program out of the Short-Doyle Act. I don't know all they did inHumboldt. I think they even ran a workshop, a sheltered workshop. It was considered therapeutic from a mental health point of view.

Shearer: It's surprising to me that more counties didn't take advantage of thh. Connolly: You know, we made a terrible mistake in the state association, in that we didn't educate the counties. Because if we had, they would have taken advantage. But the mental health directors in the counties weren't interested in telling people how they could get into the program, and parent groups weren't sophisticated enough to go and reach for the money and for the programming.

They were so preoccupied with keeping alive, and keeping schools and workshops going. In about 1956, the first federal legislation was enacted for some demonstration projects in workshops for mentally retarded adults. I saw a little story in the paper about it, and so I called the federal building here. Phillip Schafer was the U.S. Rehabilitation Western Regional director then, and he said, "Well, I have to tell you, I haven't heard a word about it, but it would be administered through the state. So why don't you call Andrew Marrin, the state director of rehabilitation."

So I called him and it was one of the days when Andy Marrin was answering the phone himself. He used to do that periodically to find out what was going on around [laughs]. So he answered the phone; and I said, "May I speak to Mr. Marrin?" and he says, "Speaking." So I told him what I'd read in the paper, and there was a little silence, and he said, "They haven't told me anything about it ."

But he said, "I'll send a man down to see you, and you tell him what it is you've got in mind. And then we'll write to Washington or phone them or something, and we'll find out."

So he sent Dr. Nathan Nelson* down, who lived in Plarin county, and who was the regional director. I later introduced Dr. Nelson at a conference in Chicago with this story, because it amused me so. He came into this pathetic little workshop we had, with these kids folding newspapers and not much of a staff.

Dr. Nelson came to our little San Francisco workshop on Balboa Street. So I told him what I'd seen in the paper, and what I had in mind, and he looked around the building and he said, "You want to do what with what for what?" So I put it on paper, and we got, with New York and Florida, one of the first three grants.

Shearer: And the grants were for--

*His wife, Helen Ewing Nelson, was first consumer counsel in the State of California, appointed by Edmund G. (Pat) Brown, Sr. Connolly: The first was a one-year planning grant, to plan a work-training center for mentally retarded adults. And then we got a three-year grant, which was extended to a four-year grant, to open a work- shop, and do a demonstration. So, we got some really top level staff, all of whom made twice as much as 1 was making [chuckling]. We got Dr. Katz, who was then a psychologist as Sonoma, Eli Katz. And we got Myra Schapps, who was a really top-drawer social worker. And Dr. Harold Dent, who was later the founder of the Black Psychologists of the Bay Area, and is very active in a number of mental health things around. He was for a time, too, the coor- dinator of retardation services for the federal government in these western states. Anyhow, we got very good people, and we took the year to plan, and then opened a shop on Ninth Avenue.

Developing Training for Appropriate Social Behavior

Connolly: Out of this, we began to see the problems which led to a second proposal. Congress introduced for six years, that is, every other year over a period of six years, a bill called Independent Living Rehabilitation for the Mentally Retarded. And I was so sure that the bill was going to fly, that we asked for a grant to demonstrate it in advance, which we got. We got a four-year grant.

Shearer: Of federal money.

Connolly: Of federal money; we had to put up some matching money, but that was fairly easy to get matching money for that kind of a proposal, you know. Levi Strauss gave us money, San Francisco Foundation, and so on.

The premise was that it wasn't intellect that was holding mentally retarded people back on job placement; it wastheir social behavior, their judgment about doing certain things. It was their being promoted beyond their capabilities. It was in their social behavior; either they didn't bathe frequently or correctly, or they didn't have their hair done properly, didn't think to get a haircut, had dirty, long fingernails, you know, all those kinds of things. And so it was a program which helped people develop a work person- ality.

The work skill was not as important in the program; it was getting there on time, it was not refusing to take a coffee break (some of the kids wanted to work straight through), it was going to lunch at the proper time. We began to see that for some of these people, really, paid work was -not their goal. And there really wasn't any point, in my book, in forcing work on them, if they either had money, and could live at home, or were getting social security from a retired parent, and that met their needs. Then, why work for pay? Connolly: So, we put in a component of training for volunteer work. We worked the training through hospitals for the aged, or parks department for cleaning the parks, or doing chores for people, or whatever. But we worked out a program for them. They didn't know what to do with their leisure time. If they had a job, they weren't accepted on the bowling team by the other guys, they weren't asked to go out and have a drink after work, they weren't asked here or there or the other place.

We helped them develop their own social structure. What we were aiming for was a whole man. Andrew Marrin was very supportive. When the grants ran out, he supported this 100 percent with state funding because he believed in it so much. And we had a lot of success, not only in placing people on jobs as a result of it, but helping people to learn to live independently.

Some of them went into apartments, or they went into a kind of a mother-in-law apartment in a private home. And they were able to cope very well. We taught them about police, and fire, and telephones, and all the things that other people learn automatically when they grow up in a family. These kids just didn ' t have the opportunity.

But the federal legislation failed. It never was funded, after all that time. We ran it for about eight years, I.guess.

Shearer: But they didn't ask for the money back?

Connolly: No, we had done the demonstration. I just don't know what happened, but--

Shearer: What is being done to carry forward this idea, which seems perfectly sound, and productive?

Connolly: Not too much. Not too much. I think it was in Pat Brown's period as governor. They did not like the name of our program, Independent Living Rehabilitation (ILRP), and asked that if we were going to get rehabilitation money that we change it to Adult Vocational Program, which we did. The Adult Vocational Program is still going, but it's not quite the same thing that we were doing. I don't know why. I don't know whether the need is so great, they're taking more clients and keeping them longer. Because we tried to set a maximun of two years in that program. Then aylient would go to an activity center, if that's what they needed. They'd go out on their own, they'd go to a job. Or they might even go to a more sophisticated workshop, like the community workshop, which set up a unit in mental retardation, or to a less demanding activity center.

Shearer: Can you place this in time now? What year did the three-year demonstration project begin--the project that actually took eight years? Connolly: I'm not sure I can tell you the years. I have the reports at home. The planning grant must have been about 1956. And then four years of the workshop; then 1962 to 1965, ILRP.

More Legislative Supporters

Connolly: I would like to say a couple of things about Goodwin Knight. Because he had money. He had all that war profit money in the treasury. He was a genial man, he relied a lot on the staff and the legislature. Lanterman was there even then (he was a young man) but he was on one of the budget committees, I think. Rappaport was the director of mental hygiene. And then Senator McBride .

Senator McBride held two intensive hearings, up and down the state, on the problems of all handicapped people. McBride chaired the Senate Interim Committee on the Education and Rehabilitation of Handicapped Children and Adults. He felt that conditions were worse for all handicapped persons in 1957 than when Governor Earl Warren had deplored them. He focused on work-oriented problems, use of insurance funds in retraining and maximizations of federal dollars. He took into account industrially injured and insurance, and all that kind of thing. Oh, they are marvelous reports. In 1955 and 1957 he did those. And he was a very powerful man. So the governor kind of--sat back and let the legislature do it, and he didn't veto angthing.

Those reports included mental retardation, they included all the other developmental disabilities, like cerebral palsy and so on, and physically handicapped people- everything. Out of those grew a lot of legislation. McBride carried some; Dorothy Donahoe carried some. I don't really remember, but Carly Porter, I guess, was always just there supporting us, because he was always on Ways and Means.

Frank Belotti and Carlos Bee, they were on Ways and Means, and they were all interested and supportive.

Shearer: I had a specific question on legislators who either helped or hindered you. Of course, I'm curious about the San Francisco legislators.

Connolly: In the early years the speaker, Tommy Malone, was a tower of strength, although to his dying day he called me Alice.

Shearer: I mean a little later, when Moscone and Brown and Burton were-- Connolly: Burton and Moscone were great, just great. Phil Burton particularly was very, very helpful. And Moscone, too, was always--Of course, George Moscone was the part-time playground director where my kids played, you know. And I had given some money for his first campaign to be a supervisor. And he knew when Anne was born and everything. So he was always helpful. He came along a little later, of course.

When Dorothy Donahoe died so suddenly in 1960 (she died in an asthma attack) Jerome Waldie picked up where she left off, and became subcommittee chairman of the Assembly Ways and Means Committee on the severely mentally retarded. He had Lanterman and Petris on his committee, all great supporters. Waldie did just a magnificent job. He put out, first of all, a report called "A Redefinition of the State's Responsibility for California's Mentally Retarded." That was very good, and kind of echoed the earlier Warren report, but it was focused only on the mentally retarded.

Attempts at Comprehensive Planning

Connolly: And then in 1961, Senator McBride authored a resolution asking for a comprehensive mental health plan. Brown had appointed Dr. Daniel Blaine, who came out, I thhk, from Pennsylvania. Very fine man. And I was asked to serve on the planning committee. The whole thing was based on his elaborate zonal classification of people. We had this big chart, and then the committees were divided according to that. We all had to go into this.

Well, under mental retardation, it was under the zone of mental illness. And I kept saying to Dr. Blaine, "Mental retardation is not an illness. It is a condition of life that's normal for the mentally retarded person." And he would just act like he didn't hear me, or he would go off someplace. And finally one of his staff told me that this whole big chart had been copyrighted, and he couldn't change it without re-copyrighting [laughing], and he didn't want to do that. So I thought, "Oh well. "

The group working with Dr. Blaine got out a report in March, 1962. They had focused, however, almost entirely on mental health and rehabilitation. By this time it was clear that mental retardation (and later developmental disabilities) would go down a separate path from mental health. Meanwhile, Waldie was still going strong on mental retardation. Connolly: At that point, Governor Pat Brown got into the act and in 1963 established a Study Commission on Mental Retardation, chaired by Jack (later Judge) Halpin and staffed by a brilliant man, Leo Lippman. The commission created a report: The Undeveloped Resource that was used all over the United States as a blueprint for services. Governor Brown established the commission, I think, to obtain more visibility for our "cause" and because mental retardation had become, believe it or not, fashionable.

The Long Range Plan, LRP, was strictly a cleaning-up of the Short-Doyle Act which had been in place long enough for the bugs to be evident. It did not deal with mental retardation at all and I did not follow it. If there was distinction between Dr. Blaine's efforts and Lanterman-Petris-Short it probably was that the committee working with Blaine was working on administrative reform as much as anything.

The mental health plan was kind of a refining of what Short- Doyle means to the mentally retarded. And I think what we finally did was refine it to "mental health services for the retarded." The original act was more comprehensive; and it talked about rehabilitation and so on. But what we agreed on then (because wealready had a mental retardation system by this time) was that in that planning, Short-Doyle would come in where needed. In other words, wherever counseling, psychiatry, this kind of support was needed, Short-Doyle would supplement whatever else was going on. And so it clarified the picture, really.

Shearer: Now, you say the mental retardation system was already in place, this being by 1962?

Connolly: Yes, it was in place in the sense that we had school programs. The Department of Rehabilitation was serving workshops around the state. There were activity centers that were supported by adult education or by other educational funds. The placement in state hospitals was handled through the county health department in most counties--not all counties--but most counties. So that we had kind of a system.

Waldie's planning was pointing toward a much clearer system, that eventually developed a department. The psychiatrists were still treating mentally retarded people in the system as kind of stepchildren. They really didn't see the role of service to the mentally retarded in the mental health system.

Shearer: Because they couldn't see a cure?

Connolly: That's right. I think that was the basis of it really; there was no cure. Connolly: As I say, Waldie was working on his project. Governor Brown then asked for this big study commission, and it had all these people on it, including Halpin, Lippman, Patricia Lawford, and Mrs. Martin Dinkelspiel, Senator MacAteer, Jack Morrison, who was a Supervisor, all from.San Francisco; Alan Short, and all state department heads. They came up with this report: The Undeveloped Resource.

In fact it was in that report that the concept--somebody put it this way: "What we want to do is give the cltent a credit card around his neck. So that he's not housed at the state hospital, or pushed here, but so he can go out and purchase what is appropriate to him." And that5 the basic philosophy that led to development of the regional centers. That the regional centers can purchase anything that will help a client to cope. And so that was what evolved out of that, was the regional centers.

Shearer : How did this work?

Connolly: The Undeveloped Resource came up with thirty-five recommendations for legislative action. Waldie carried the bill to establish the regional center system effective in 1965 and then left the legislature to run unsuccessfully for governor, and Lanterman picked up the torch.

There were hearings coming out of your ears. Leo Lippman did a very smart thing, though. He went to the community colleges, and he asked them to put on the hearings in their districts. So he had a couple of dozen hearings throughout the state. The legislators would attend, plus 500 to 800 people, and they would hear his commitment to mental retardation services. It was a subtle way of lobbying bills before they were introduced. People understood the purpose, had their say, and there was great support by hundreds of people. The effect was that when the legislation was ready, it would fly.

Shearer: So this was then sixty--

Connolly: Well, that report came out in '65, January of '65. The study committee, I think, went on for at least two or three years. The enabling legislation was '61, and then the governor made the appointments, and the report came out January of '65. So they must.have worked through part of '62, and '63 and '64.

Shearer: And then the elements in the study committee report which found their way into legislation are contained in:

Connolly: The,it's called, the report.

Shearer: How did these conclusions find their way into legislation? Connolly: The men who were on the committee, like Alan Short and MacAteer, worked with Waldie and Lanterman and his committee. I really don't remember who actually introduced bills.

Shearer: But they were individual bills. It was not in the--

Connolly: Oh, yes. They were individual bills that grew out of this. Waldie and Lanterman, of course, did the major part of it. By 1971, Lanterman had in place the Lanterman Mental Retardation Services Act.* And in the senate, George Miller was very support- ive, Moscone was supportive, Willie Brown was up there then, I think, yes. And he was involved, because he was on Ways and Means.

Shearer: And was he an ally?

Connolly: Oh yes, always. He's done a lot of good things for us over the years. Yes, he's always very sensitive to it. And at that time there was--[searching her memory]--oh, I can't say his name. There was a man who was black, he was a neighbor of mine, who was a supervisor. And he was very effective in helping us, too. In fact, I think he was appointed to this committee, and then resigned because he couldn't keep working on it.

Shearer: I have a picture of somebody ...I can't think of the name either. Maybe it will come.

Connolly: Francois.

Shearer: Oh! Terry Francois, yes, of course. He was up there with Morrison and Short. IV THE REAGAN ADMINISTRATION AND MENTAL RETARDATION

Aeencv Reorganization in Health and Welfare

Connolly: Governor Brown was always very supportive. He did reorganize the departments into that Health and Welfare Agency, you know, a superagency with the other departments under it.

Shearer: Excuse me, I thought you meant the reorganization that took place under Reagan.

Connolly: The major one did. This one under Brown didn't last very long, because Reagan just pulled that all apart and did his own master reorganization, which was horrible.

Was Spencer Williams with Brown, or was he with Reagan?

Shearer: Spencer Williams was appointed by Governor Reagan.

Connolly: [chuckles] Brown appointed--I can see his face, but I can't remember his name. He was the Director of Health and Welfare. And he kind of took over things that, in my opinion, he really didn't understand. Winslow Christian. He thought it was a business reorganization, without understanding what.

And of course when Governor Reagan came in, it was even much, much worse.

Shearer: There's an interesting development, or evolution, of organizations, as it relates to the mentally retarded--well, to the whole health and human resources field. When Earl Warren took office, he dismantled, or reorganized, the Department of Institutions, and made them functionally separate. Then under Governor Reagan's reorganization plan, so many things were pulled together under the Department of Health.

Connolly: There were twenty-five agencies reporting to the Department of Health at one time. Shearer: And abo.ut fifty thousand employees.

Connolly: Yes. And it was a disaster.

Shearer: And yet the consolidation followed the Short-Doyle move towards decentralized treatment facilities and reduction of state hospital population. Everybody seemed to agree that that was a good idea.

Connolly: Yes, it went through fairly easily. But I think, in retrospect, it went too quickly. The state hadn't divested themselves of a lot of things. They were still directly funding workshops in the community. They were funding polio centers, and rehabilitation centers for the severely handicapped. They were funding all kinds of things, and the Department of Rehabilitation, for instance, couldn't get its voice heard, ever, in the work that it was doing.

Shearer: Now, when you said it went too quickly, did you mean too quickly following Short-Doyle?

Connolly: No, no, I meant the decentralization idea. The idea of the state government saying that--maybe I misunderstood you, but I thought you were saying that Short-Doyle said, "The counties will run the programs, and we'll just let the money flow." But they didn't do that with any other program. There was still Crippled Childrens' Services, with which the state was deeply involved. Well, that was run by the county. But there was a lot of state involvement. They were still running directly a lot of stuff from the Department of Rehabilitation, or funding directly. There were state schools still going, for example, the school for the handicapped out at Lake Merced. There were a lot of things that were direct service.

It seems to me that the state needed to divest themselves of that, before they could do the reorganization, the decentrali- zation. Because all of those department heads complained that they couldn't get anyone to listen to their voice for their budget. [tape recorder turned off while interviewee reviews papers and reports]

Connolly: I was wrong before about ~aldie'sreport. Dorothy Donahoe died in April of 1960. And McBride had done his two reports, which included the mentally retarded, in 1955 and '57. When Dorothy died in '60, Waldie took over her committee, and he did a study that came out "The Redefinition of the State Responsibility for California's Mentally Retarded. "

Shearer: In 19--

Connolly: I don't know, that's where I'm lost. I've got that date, and I'll have to get it to you. Shearer: But post-1960?

Connolly: Yes. And then, in '61, McBride asked for a mental health study, and that was the one that Blaine did. And there was a report out in '62 on that. See, I was wrong when I was giving you those dates before. I said '65, and it was '62.

Shearer: Okay. So '62 was the one by Judge Jack Halpin--

Connolly: No, it was .'62 that was the mental health study. McBride asked for a mental health study, which is not mental retardation. It was Governor Brown who asked for the mental retardation study, with Judge Halpin. He just set up his own governor's committee. And they reported in January of 1965.

Governor Reagan 's Act ions on Mental Retardat ion /I /I

Connolly: With regard to Governor Reagan, he had campaigned that he would cut, and cut, and cut. So everybody was rather geared up for the cuts, and were expecting the worst. One of the things he attempted to do was to cut welfare quite drastically. But the courts repudiated that, when it was taken to them. The courts said that he could not make those cuts. That they were illegal. In 1967 he announced that he was going to set up a program that would close all state hospitals by 1980. At that time there were 10,000 people in all the state hospitals and about an equal number on the waiting list.

He cut their budget by twenty percent. And all the time he was blaming welfare for the fact that his first budget had a $300 million deficit in it, which Alan Post, legislative analyst, publicized very well by saying that the legislature ought to look at that very carefully to see if it could fly. Reagan continued to talk about cutting the programs in the hospitals, and so on, and the parents really rallied.

They had big meetings; they picketed the Capitol; they really went after the governor. And Lanterman supported the parents. Lanterman at that time, if I remember correctly, was chairman of Assembly Ways and Means. Republican support on Ways and Means was crucial to the governer. So with the parents making all this noise and with Lanterman not supporting him (and then Moscone held a whole series of hearings around the Bay Area)--

Shearer: This was in '67?

Connolly: Yes, right. The governor backed down. Connolly: Now, in thinking about it, we were really so concerned about the programs for the mentally retarded that we really weren't concerned about the mentally ill. And I don't think he backed down on any of the cuts for the mentally ill. He just went ahead with those. But Sonoma State Hospital and the other hospitals in the south that served solely mentally retarded people got some of the cuts rescinded. But, in the meanwhile, all or most of the county welfare departments--and I'm not sure how this came about, because it was such a surprise to all of us, and we were so busy mopping up the consequences that we didn't look back to see what had caused them. Most of these welfare departments were interviewing people on welfare, telling them that if they took people out of the state hospital into their homes, they could make a lot of money and they could get off welfare. And before we could turn around, there were a hundred people from Sonoma State Hospital in San Francisco in substandard housing, with no licenses, with no standards, with no supervision. Because at the same time the Bureau of Licensing had taken a real cut. They didn't have as much staff as they had had previously.

So here we were, with a hundred people, who needed day care, who needed workshops, who needed activity centers. And we were so busy trying to see what was going on and help people get back to the hospital (if that was a more appropriate place), that I don't really know how that policy was carried out. Perhaps the welfare money was withheld from the counties unless they reduced the caseload to a certain number of people.

Later, when licensing was re-established, most of those homes were closed.

Shearer: These were what we would now call board and care homes?

Connolly: Yes, board and care homes.

Shearer: But essentially they were private families or people, who offered a room and something to eat to people who were right out of state hospitals, mentally retarded. And this was done on the advice of -- ?

Connolly: I assume it came from the state, because so many of the county welfare departments did it. I don't think they would have done it unless their money was being withheld by the state until they cut down on the number of recipients. I really don't know what happened there. Somebody who had worked in the Department of Social Welfare might be the person who would know really how that all came about.

There was no screening of the people, there was nothing. It was just a-- Shearer: No screening on either side, either the mentally retarded or the board and care operators.

Connolly: No. It was just a question of finding a bed that was cheap. When you look at it from Earl Warren's day to Reagan's day, the things that Warren had been complaining about--and his staff had been complaining about--had never been corrected, really. We were just beginning the process. We had done quite a lot, but we weren't anywhere near where we needed to be when all this-was cut back.

I was looking at the California Journal the other day to refresh my mind, and I thought this was very amusing. Governor Reagan had a $300 million deficit the first term in office. The second term, Alan Post warned that it was going to be much larger. Oh, and the governor had concealed that--he had denied that he had that deficit, until he was re-elected, and then he said, yes, he did.

So then, Alan Post, the legislative auditor, said that it was going to be greater than that. Then, there was a big upsurge in business revenue, and tax revenue in California. You see, Governor Reagan had cut taxes, when he first came in. But there was an upsurge, which, according to Alan Post (whom I always respected as an honest man and an extremely sharp one), it had absolutely nothing to do with Governor Reagan's admini- stration. It had to do with national affairs, it had to do w?th a lot of other things, but it had nothing to do with what the governor had done. And I'm wondering if President Reagan is now thinking that same thing's going to happen. Because that upsurge aided his deficit, and he was okay again. But it was just one of those things, that had really no connection with his actions.

One thing that Governor Reagan did, any program that came to him that was marked "mental retardation," like, at that time there were some mental retardation diagnostic centers--those budgets were not cut.

Shearer: Why?

Connolly: Well, I was told by a doctor, who was a neighbor of the Reagans that Patty Davis was diagnosed as mentally retarded when she was young. (You know, the daughter who doesn't use their name.) I was told that the diagnosis was finally severe emotional disturbance, but the Reagans refused to accept that; they liked mental retardation better. So they sent her to a school in Arizona. I began watching because she told me this early on in the Reagan administration. The girl was in Arizona, and only once in those eight years did she ever come to Sacramento. Just one visit. And they always went to Arizona for Christmas, and for certain vacations, and so on, because the Davis family lived in

Arizona, and they oversaw her. I Connolly: I've forgotten the name of the school that she was at; it's been publicized in the papers a number of times. But it was a school that was, in some ways, considered to be kind of a dumping ground for very difficult children of very wealthy people. It was an extremely expensive school. I often wondered about her refusing to use their name, and so on. But apparently they told people in those days that she was mentally retarded. So I thought maybe that was the reason.

What the governor didn't see was when he cut--for example, he signed ~oscone'sschool lunch bill, but he cut all the money out of it. He cut day-care centers way down. He cut crippled childrens' services. He cut rehabilitation, he cut public health, and so on. Every time he cut those programs, that affected mentally retarded people, because whatever affects people, affects the mentally retarded. So that while all the things that were labelled "mental retardation" he left alone; these other things were cut way back.

At that point, he cut 3400 jobs out of the State Department of Mental Hygiene.

Shearer: Well apparently, right in the beginning--actually, it doesn't sound quite as severe as what you just said--3400 jobs out of the Department of Mental Hygiene--Phil Battaglia announced in 1967 that three thousand jobs would be cut in four agencies, among them the Department of Mental Hygiene. But you're saying it was concentrated in that department?

Connolly: Well, he'd closed two state hospitals, and that's how they got that. He closed one up at Applegate, that was at Dewitt, I think. Four releases were required for every admission.

State Hospital Conditions

Shearer: It was striking to me that there was such an indictment of state hospital care of the mentally retarded and the mentally ill in 1967. This was ten years after the Short-Doyle legislation was passed. Here the California Commission of Staffing Standards had issued their report (actually a year or two earlier), indicating that they were simply warehouses for this long-term care.

Connolly: Well, let me tell you. When I first visited Sonoma, I believe, early in 1952 (there was some kind of a hearing up there), the odor would knock you down, just going in the place. It was just incredible. In the dormitories, the kids had to crawl over the beds to get to their beds. There was no space between the beds Connolly: at all. No youngster had any personal belongings of any kind whatsoever--no toy, no book, no nothing--because there was no place to store anything. Gunnar Dybwad, when they had later hearings, said the staff were in just as bad trouble because there was no place to sit down and have a cup of coffee. How could you ask staff to work--and he said the bathrooms for the staff were inadequate. The toilets for the mentally retarded people had no doors on the stalls and no seats on the toilet.

They were given a bowl of gruel three times a day. The superintendent, when he was asked why, said that they were afraid the retarded would choke on solid food, and they didn't want to take that danger. But as a result, their teeth were falling out. They wore, most of them, a kind of a garment that was made in San Quentin, with nothing on under it. The place was just incredible, just incredible.

And I was so angry, I--my husband had written a story about, I don't know, I think the Alameda County Fair. And as a result he got a whole slew of invitations to write a column about other fairs. One of them was Sonoma. They invited us as guests for the weekend. And we went around and saw the fair and everything.

At that time, fair money went back to the county. (Now it goes to the general fund from the horse racing.) The PR man said they had so much money that they tore out all the women's toilets in the fairgrounds, and they put in these stand-up toilets that had just come in, and they decorated, and he said they were just looking for ways to spend money. They were offering the newsmen gifts. (My husband would never accept them, but I think they did send a box of apples, or something.) Anyhow, I reported this to the senate committee, whoever they were. I had no idea who they were, I was just so angry. And later, Bank Mikkelson came from Denmark, and he said, "In Denmark, we don't treat our pigs that way."

And that's true here, too. At the county fair, everything was much nicer than the Danish delegation was being shown up there at Sonoma State Hospital. So, they had a long way to go, that's one thing. The other thing, Short-Doyle really did not impact at all on the mentally retarded. Because the counties weren't using Short-Doyle money in relation to mental retardation.

Shearer: Is that because counties didn't know or the parents didn't know that they could get their children out of the state hospitals into more varied, nurturing settings? Connolly: Well, there weren't very nurturing settings. That's what ARC was doing, was trying to provide. We got the community college to set up classes for the board and care operators, and we got the Bureau of Licensing to demand that they take so many classes a year in order to upgrade their skills. We pushed to get more staff on the Bureau of Licensing, so that there'd be people to look at what was going on. Also, the licensing was divided; the Department of Welfare had certain licenses, and the Bureau of Licensing licensed other people. I never did sort it out in my mind clearly, I just know we worked with both groups.

The Bureau of Social Work in San Francisco was supposed to supervise the people placed in housing here, but they were placing so many of them in inadequate places. Now some of them were just lovely, and they were beautiful families. And some that are still going have done a horrendous job. But there just was no place to bring these people, to do a good job.

If you go in the Tenderloin now, it is full of mentally retarded people living in those old hotels where they were placed years ago when they were taken out of Sonoma State Hospital without any supervision. They did away with the Bureau of Social Work, then, a little later. So there's been no continuity. That's what we were reaching for in the regional centers. Because the regional center had lifetime responsibility for a client. They must stay with that client for the rest of his life, unless he moves out of the district or dies. And then, if he moves any place else in California, he's automatically transferred to another regional center.

Shearer: I want to get into a more detailed description of the role of the regional centers in a minute. But before we leave the beginning of the Reagan,administration, in 1967 there was this report in the San Francisco Chronicle of the deplorable, really truly deplorable conditions in Sonoma. You just described how Governor Reagan seemed to leave mentally retarded programs alone--not cutting them. And yet his cuts were all in the hospitals serving that same population.

Connolly: Yes, well because those hospitals are run by the Department of Mental Hygiene, and he didn't get involved in that. No, it was kind of a simplistic thing. When he saw something labelled "mental retardation," it seemed to us he left it alone, In fact, after the parents of the mentally retarded got fussing, he added $1.1 million to mental retardation services for the communities. After he cut the hosptals twenty-two million dollars that year. And that, you know, that was just incredible.

Shearer: So you think he just couldn't visualize that the mental hospitals were serving a population of mentally retarded people. Connolly: That's right. And Spencer Williams didn't know what he was doing as Director of Health and Welfare, I swear. The governor also vetoed a bill--I thhk it was Moscone's bill--which would have maintained and gone beyond. You know, we'd been working over the years to try and get the APA (American Psychiatric Association) national standards. And we'd get a little bit, and a little bit, and a little bit. But there was so much to do everywhere, that with the available energy, you know, you could only do so much. So we were just getting to that point when Governor Reagan vetoed a bill which would have maintained the existing level of care in the hospitals until the patients got settled in the community. So that you'd have a proper transition.

Gunnar Dybwad Study of Sonoma State Hospital

Connolly: Then someplace in there in the 1960s, Bank Mikkelson--and I notice you've got his name in some report--no, it wasn't your report, it was a legislative report, they call him McElson, I think it was. But anyhow, Bank Mikkelson was the Director of Mental Retardation for Denmark, and he visited Sonoma State Hospital and was just horrified. As a result of that in San Francisco, we got a group of parents together, and decided not to do it officially through the agency, but they were all members of the ARC. They put up enough money to bring Gunnar Dybwad [spells name] out from Brandeis University.

This group of parents asked Dr. Dybwad to come out. Now, Dybwad had been the mental retardation expert for seven years for the World Health Organization. He'd been the executive director of the National Association for Retarded Children for seven years. (He only believed in jobs for seven years.) And seven years with the International Association on Mental Retardation and then he was teaching at Brandeis. And he said he would come if Dr. James Lowry, who was director of the State Department of Mental Health, would agree to his coming. Lowry said that he was going to have a study of his own, that it wasn't necessary.

So the parents went to Quentin Kopp, who was then I guess on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Quentin had been on the ARC board for six years. In fact, one of my favorite stories, if I can digress, is that I always believed that volunteers ought to be coming to do volunteer work to get something out of it for themselves. I was always suspicious of people who said they only wanted to help the dear little kids. So, some friend of mine sent Quentin Kopp to me, who said that he wanted to be a volunteer or serve on a committee, or do something in ARC. And I said, "Oh, that's great, what brought you to us? Why did you think of this?" And he said, "Well, I'm going to run for the Board of Supervisors, and I was told that you'd give me good exposure." [laughter] Shearer: Well, that's being up front.

Connolly: Isn't it? I said, "Fine, we'll give you good exposure." So he volunteered his legal services. He had a law office. He went on to ask the Department of Mental Hygiene when they were going to have the study. And time went on, and on, and no study.

I'm not sure exactly when he filed suit. No, he just threatened first to file a suit. He said that he was going to court. And they said, "Well,.no, we'll do it right away. And we'll have Dr. Dybwad as one of the people who'll investigate Sonoma. "

Shearer: This is Dr. Lowry's office saying this?

Connolly: Yes, Dr. Lowry's office said, "We'll do it, and we'll have Dr. Dybwad." So they invited Dr. Dybwad, and two other people (I think Dr. Irving Phillips from Langley Porter, and somebody from southern California), and they did a study of the hospital. Dybwad does a marvelous study of a hospital. He always drops in about two in the morning, and he comes at five another day, and he really gets to know what's going on before he's through. He lived in a hotel right near, and he just kept running around, talking to everybody.

So. Lowry received the report, and our little group and ARC asked for a copy of the report. And Dr. Lowry said first that it wasn't going to be available to the public. So that's when Quentin filed a suit. And the judge said that yes, it must be available to the public. Well, months went on, months went on. Lowry said that they were editing it, there were things about it, they had to talk to the people again. So Quentin went back to the court. And this time the judge said, "Well, if you can't get it out of Dr. Lowry, tell Gunnar Dybwad that we'd like to have his copy." So Dybwad sent his copy.

The report was all that we expected. That there were just very bad conditions. Senator Milton Marks was on the committee that held a hearing about this. And I know he was terribly embarrassed by the governor, but he stood behind the parents all the way. Senator Milton Marks was an influential member of that committee as a Republican and he did not let the issues die. He has stayed with our causes to this day. He said it was very evident that a report like that belongs in the community, it didn't belong put away in a drawer someplace.

It was the Senate Business and Professiona1.Committee that held the hearing. That was in 1969. They asked Dr. Dybwad to be present, too, and Spencer Williams, and Lowry; and Senator Short came. And Short, when they were asking questions of the Connolly: staff said--when he got up to talk--"I wish you wouldn't blame the staff. They are told by the director of the agency, 'We've got this much cloth. Now you cut a program to fit the cloth.' You cannot ask them questitins beyond that. You must ask Spencer Williams what it's all about."

So, Spencer Williams talked around and about for a long time. The upshot was that Department of Finance said, "There's just no money." And Senator Short said, "Well, you know, when Governor Pat Brown was told about conditions at Sonoma, and the fact that we had to meet those staffing standards, he went to Finance and they said 'No, there's no money.' And Governor Brown said, 'Well, find the money, ' and they did. " And he said, "I think that maybe Governor Reagan could find the money--that they could find it for him."

Shearer: That was 1969. And then, what was Governor Reagan's response to this report? Did he act on any of these recommendations to restore--

Connolly: We got some money. We got extra money in the regional centers. We got an extra pot of money in the regional centers to be able to do more placement of people.

Shearer: Now, I understood that the legislation that created the regional centers was the Lanterman Mental Retardation Services Act of 1969.

Connolly: Well, no. It was a bill introduced by Jerome Waldie. The Lanterman Mental Retardation Services Act pulled everything together.

We opened our regional center in San Francisco, we got our contract, in '65. ARC ran it for ten years. We opened the doors in January of--I think--'66. Lanterman did a whole series of studies on what was lacking. Because we set it up as kind of innocents, really. Nobody had ever done this, and it was incredible how many states came to see us, and asked for our reports, and copied us. Except that they improved on it. We told them our mistakes, and they didn't make them. We're still making them here [chuckling].

Shearer: That must be why at one point they talk about nine regional centers, and then subsequently, nineteen.

Connolly: Yes. First there were two, Los Angeles and ours, San Francisco. Then nine, and then they added others as they went along. And the Lanterman Act kind of wrapped up everything. Shearer: It created the regional centers, the area boards--thirteen area .boards-the Office of Developmental Disabilities, and the planning mechanism, too, for the statewide system.

I'm afraid we're straying more from Governor Reagan, and I don't want to let these things slip by. I want to go back to Spencer Williams for a moment. Now, Charles Warren asked for Dr. Lowry's resignation, and Spencer Williams' retort was, "This would be over my dead body." Did it have to do with Lowry's withholding this report, or did it have to do with his willingness to make cuts in the mental health budget?

Connolly: I think it had to do with his willingness to make any cuts the governor asked for. He seemed not to have any real committment to anything. I don't know; he was a pleasant enough man, very low key.

Role of Parent Associations

Connolly: I must say that during those years I didn't stay as close to the mental health issue. We fought our own battle, really outside of the main stream. So we kind of went over Lowry's head; we just didn't worry too much about him. We would meet with him at times, but we used the mechanism of the parentassociations. We had very strong parent groups in those days.

Shearer: And they spoke to Spencer Williams?

Connolly: They spoke mostly to their own legislators. And they never stopped talking to their own legislators. In the beginning they talked to Spencer Williams, but it was evident that that was not helpful or useful. They talked to Dr. Lowry, and that didn't get them very far. But they did talk to newspapers, they talked to radio and television, and they talked to their legislators over and over again, and they made it very clear.

We had, as we did in the beginning, some very prominent people in this state. Barry Sullivan, the movie actor, was one of the people who was always willing to come up and testify. Roy Rogers testified in the early days for our education bill.*

"Allowing permissive classes for the moderately retarded to be supported with state funds. Connolly: The thing is that mental retardation is not a respector of class, of money, or anything else. So that we had families both south and north who were very wealthy and very influential-- powerful families one way or another, who had mentally retarded children. And they were willing to talk to their legislators. And then there were a lot of hearings, as you can see, and we packed them with parents who asked to testify. Some of them told very touching stories, but real stories.

So that the governor really wasn't in a good position. We kind of bypassed the governor, and Spencer Williams, and Dr. Lowry. We kept good relations with Dr. Lowry, but ignored him really, is what it came down to.

Shearer: What about his successor, Dr. Stubblebine?

Connolly : Oh, please.

Shearer: I had to ask.

Connolly: I wouldn't want to be quoted. Dr. Stubblebine was Mental Health Director in San Francisco briefly, and everybody was glad to see him go. He wasn't any more effective in Sacramento, and he didn't stay very long. I don't think he was an organization man, or knew how to administer. When he was in San Francisco, for instance, because we had a mental retardation unit in the mental.health unit, every once in a while he would call me, and say, "Oh Margarete, I've got an excellent idea of something we can do. I've got a plan in mind of something we can do with the mentally retarded people in the department."

I'd say, "Fine." We'd make a date, I'd come down there, and he wouldn't remember why he'd called me. So when we'd refresh his memory, he'd have some kind of vague plan. Usually it was something that just wouldn't work. So, I'd go back to the office, and a couple of weeks later I'd get another phone call [laughs]. I don't know whether this ought to be in the report or not.

And so help me, I ran into him in Sacramento after he was appointed by Reagan. He said, "Margarete! Will you come over to the office, I've got--". He had done that four times to me here in San Francisco, and I stopped going. I saw him in Sacramento, and he wanted to do the same thing. I said, "Let's go have a cup of coffee right -now." So we went and had a cup of coffee, and he had some hair-brained idea that didn't mean anything and that he couldn't have carried out anyhow. I don't even remember what it was. Oh, he didn't last. He lasted what, a year, or something?

Shearer: It was very brief. Connolly: Yes. Nice -man.

Shearer: So you didn't find much in the way of aid from his office.

Connolly: Oh dear no. As I say, we just ignored the Department of Mental Hygiene and went our own way.

San Francisco County Mental Health Advisory Board

Shearer: All right. How did the official groups, that is, the Citizens' Advisory Council, how did they play a role? They were supposed to report to--

Connolly: I really don't know. They focused totally on mental health. The only mental health thing I was involved with was the San Francisco County Mental Health Advisory Board, and that was mainly after 1976. That was controlled by Irving Rosenblatt. And when Irving wanted something in Sacramento that we could help him with, or one of our parents could help, he would call, if he needed some bodies to go to Sacramento or something. And we'd always support him.

Irving was as much responsible for the Short-Doyle Act as Senator Short was, as was Dr. Alfred Auerback of San Francisco. Irving took a year out of his law practice to work with Alan Short on the design of the legislation. He had, previous to that, carried on very heavy correspondence with New York, where they had an advanced--for its day--system. After the bill was first drafted, he went to New York. He stayed there for a couple of months, and talked to people, examined what they were doing. He got people to tell him where the mistakes and where the bugs were. And he came back and shared that with Dr. [Portia Bell] Hume, Dr. Auerback, and with Senator Short.

They finally worked the whole thing out. Then he took the next, I'd say, six months. He started in San Diego, and he went from one end of the state to the other and lobbied. He got into every meeting and every group and every person that he could think of. He got editorials in the papers. He really did a job.

Shearer: What was his incentive? Did he have a family member who was mentally ill?

Connolly: Not that I know of. This was mental illness, it was Short-Doyle. It was getting the Short-Doyle legislation passed. Connolly: He had been president of the San Francisco Mental Health Association, and he'd been on that board for some years. I really don't know what his motivation beyond that was. He was a very talented man in many ways, not only in persuading you to his point of view, but he was charming, and he was intelligent. He just did a really unbelievable job of lobbying that bill through. It never would have gone through that fast without him. There was a -lot of opposition.

And then, with regard to the Advisory Boards, as I say, the only one that I'm familiar with is San Francisco. They really made it hot for the governor.

Shearer: You mean the Area of--

Connolly: No, I mean Short-Doyle. I'm still talking about the Mental Health Advisory Board. They, as I recall, were rather rough on Governor Reagan. Of course, San Francisco put more money into it, too, than any other county (added to the state money), and they always have. But beyond that, I don't know how the Citizens' Advisory Council went, how effective it was.

Shearer: By "rough" on the governor, do you mean a particular issue, or just generally kept the pressure on?

Connolly: Just kept the pressure up, yes. And it was Irving that was really doing it.

Shearer: Do you want to comment on the reorganization in 1971, grouping Rehabilitation, Public Health, Mental Health, Medical, Medicare, etc.., etc., etc., into the Department of Health?

Connolly: Only what I said before. That it was impossible for them, because they said they couldn't get anybody's ear--the department heads, I mean. There were twenty-five agencies in all that reported to that one man. He just wasn' t able to handle that. It just was a shambles.

Redefining Rehabilitation

Connolly: I was vice chairman at that time of the State Rehabilitation Advisory Board. I don't think they even have that anymore. We worked with the legislature again, to sell the governor's office on the fact that rehabilitation was productive to the state. And on getting as much of the federal money--California wasn't accepting all of the federal money that it was eligible for. Which seems to be part of Governor Reagan's philosophy, that it was tax money and so you don't spend it. So we were working on trying to get some of that money. But it was a pretty uphill battle. Connolly: I remember that one of the first things we did after Governor Brown came in was have a conference directly with Governor Brown, to see if we could get things going back on track again.

Shearer: You mean Governor Brown, Jr. ?

Connolly: Oh, no, I'm sorry. I'm confusing time limit. No, that was another issue. It was Pat Brown we conferred with on a Goodwin Knight issue. Sorry, I get my time syncs out of order.

Shearer: On the Rehabilitation Department at that time, was the difficulty that the Department construed its mission as to rehabilitate someone in the sense to cure him, to put him back into an ordinary work situation, not to have a continuing lifetime commitment.

Connolly: That's right. Once the Department started working with the mentally retarded at all (previous to that they hadn't accepted any mentally retarded clients per se. They had accepted some without really knowing it, but they said they didn't). They later adopted a philosophy, during Pat Brown's administration, that if you could get a person out of a board-and-care home-- this was the basis of a federal Independent Living Rehabilitation Act--if you can get a person out of attendant care and release the services of an attendant, that's rehabilitation. If you can get the person so a parent doesn't have to stay home twenty-four hours a day, and so that the person can even be left alone at home, that's rehabilitation. And those were the goals we were working on in our program. And the Department of Rehabilitation accepted that.

The Reagan administration said no, that rehabilitation is getting a job. And part of the reason was, the federal government had always rated states on the number of people they rehabilitate.

Shearer: In the sense of putting in an ordinary job?

Cannolly: Well, that's the question. Because I was on the national board of the National Rehabilitation Association, and I visited a lot of states. I discovered that in the Southern states, they would buy a man a pair of glasses, which meant he could go back to work, if he had broken glasses, because they had no welfare department that provided anything like that. And if he could go back to work, they called that a rehabilitation. They'd get him an appendicitis operation so he could go back to work, then that was rehabilitation. And they were way up on the chart.

California was always the bottom of the chart, actually because we did the best job. Shearer: Your standards were so high?

Connolly: We had a very, Cery fine Department of Rehabilitation.

Shearer: At what point did the state accept your definition of rehabili- tation?

Connolly: When we got the federal grant, and the period of the grant was about to run out, I went to Sacramento with the chairman of our board and had a conference with the director, Andrew Marrin, and a couple of his people. He came down and looked at what we were doing, talked to people, and agreed that he.would accept this as rehabilitation. He said, "We haven't done it before, but we'll try it." And I understand that he did it with other places, then, throughout the state. V REGIONAL CENTERS

Shearer: I'd like to talk now about the regional centers, and how they came to be established.* If you could give a whole description, or a little more extended description of how it works, the establishment of the Golden Gate Regional Center, and the Margarete Connolly Education Center, and the Touchstone Vocational Center.

Connolly: Well, 1'11 start backwards, because Touchstone and Margarete Connolly had been going for a long time, they just changed the name. And they've changed the program, I guess, from what I hear. Touchstone was meant to be practically a lifetime day activity center for mentally retarded adults and severely cerebral palsied adults. We started it as a collaborative thing with the Cerebral Palsy Association. Now it seems to be a rehabilitative job-oriented program.

Margarete Connolly Center was an activity center that had a therapeutic base with the idea that clients hopefully would not stay there forever, but might be readied for the independent living rehabilitation, might be freed. Well, I ran into one young man who had own's syndrome. I think he was rather typical. I said, "Oh, I haven't seen you in a long time, Danny, what are you doing?"

*Lanterman Mental Retardation Services Act of 1969 provided the framework for community care services through comprehensive and coordinated systems to deliver vital services to the mentally retarded. It established 19 regional centers throughout the state, which provide fixed points of referral in the community for the mentally retarded (and, in 1973, for the developmentally disabled--AB 846) to obtain special services, such as counseling and diagnostic help. Regional centers also administer funds for "purchasing services," such as respite, medical care, physical therapy, special education, and camping, from social service agencies under contract to the center. Connolly: He said that on Monday he did this, and on Tuesday he did this, and on Wednesday he went to some nursing home. And he said, "It's full of little old ladies."

And I said, "Well, what do you do there?"

He said, "I teach them to dance, and -do they --love me!" [laughs ]

So, we were doing some of that kind of thing, you know. One young woman we stumbled onto--not so young, she was in her forties--had never been in a program. She had cared for her mother, who had died at the age of eighty-eight. Her sisters now were worried about what was going to happen to her. She came in, and she didn't want to go into workshop or activity or anything, she just wanted to help around. So we had a Nearly New Shop at thatitime, and she helped around there--hung up clothes, and took the garbage out to the back, and made coffee for the volunteers, and did whatever was needed to be done.

And one time I talked to her about one of the young women in the workshop who had an apartment and had lost her roommate, and wanted to have someone move in with her. I asked this young woman if she would enjoy that, because she lived all alone. She said, "No, I wouldn't. All my life I've lived with other people, and this is the first time I've--" She didn't speak that clearly, but that was the message: "This is the first time I can do what I want when I want to do it. And I don't want any roommates." [laughing]

Shearer: Really understandable.

Connolly: It certainly is. And in that great exodus from Sonoma State Hospital, too. I'm trying to think what date that was, I think that was maybe before. When they first started, maybe during Goodwin Knight's time, about 1954 to develop the concept of bringing people back to the community. The state for the first time did psychological testing of everybody at Sonoma. They found an unconscionably high percentage were perfectly normal people who had been put there because they were behavior problems as children, or because some doctor had said they were retarded; put them away. They had no school those days in Sonoma at all, no education, never had been taught to read or write.

One young woman we brought into the Independent Living Program, and then a couple of days a week she went to the John Adams Adult School here (a public school). After a few years, she got a job. We felt that she was suited for a more advanced job, but she flatly refused to have anything but a job in a laundry. Her mother had been a patient at Sonoma and this Connolly: woman was born at Sonoma (her mother had been raped). Her mother worked in the laundry at Sonoma, and she wanted to work ?n the laundry. So she got a job in a laundry, and she was still there the last time I hear--for years she sent me a Christmas card with the most exquisite handwriting. For a girl who couldn't read or write when she came to us, it was amazing.

And she was also one of the reasons we started the Independent Living Program. She was in the old workshop, that's right. We started the Independent Living because we got her the job, and she found a place to live, and it was in a group home that at that time--no longer does, but at that time--had one-third mentally retarded, one-third mentally restored, and one-third youth hostel transients.

Finally the manager of the home called us and said that this young woman doesn't know how to cook anything but hotdogs, and that she's eating hotdogs for dinner every single night. So we made a date with her and asked her about it. We realized that at the state hospital, nobody ever saw raw food. They never knew how potatoes got to be mashed potatoes. They never knew how carrots got to be cooked and in that pan. And the only thing she'd seen, was at the Sonoma County Fair. She saw hotdogs and rolls. So she'd go to the store and buy some milk, and hotdogs, and rolls, and put them together.

Shearer: That's the only thing she recognized.

Connolly: Yes. So, we put in some cooking classes for both the men and the women from there on in. That program grew out of that experience; you know, from all these mistakes, we found out how to do this.

I've forgotten what we were talking about and I diverted again.

Shearer: We were talking about the establishment of the regional centers, Touchstone, Margarete Connolly--

Connolly: Oh, yes. Well, Touchstone and Margarete Connolly had been going for some time, but then their names were changed.

Shearer: How did Margarete Connolly come to be called Margarete Connolly Center?

Connolly: It's interesting, because I'm not sure. I had retired; they changed the name without ever consulting me [laughs]--

Shearer: Perhaps they knew you might object? Connolly: I don't know. That was the board's way of saying they wanted to honor me, and it was very nice. But I guess I don't know really what stimulated it, or who. Somebody must have suggested it, you know. I just don't know.

Shearer: How does the mission of the Touchstone differ from Margarete Connolly? They -are different?

Connolly: I really don't know. 1'm not that close to the programs.

Shearer: These are administered by the Golden Gate Regional Center?

Connolly: No, no. ARC, Aid to Retarded Citizens, now the San Francisco Association for Retarded Citizens. No, Golden Gate doesn't administer anything. Anything at all. It just takes the credit card and buys stuff for the client. They buy services at Margarete Connolly, or at Touchstone, or at a nursing home across the Bay, or at Susan Snyder Center and Creativity Explored, where my daughter goes, or at a recreation center, or wherever.

Shearer: So it's a conduit for state money. And other money as well?

Connolly: No, it's all state. I remember when we started the regional centers, the director of welfare here came to see us, and said he was so glad he had six thousand people on Aid to the Totally Disabled--you know, now the SSI, the dependent--

Shearer: Oh, Supplemental Security Income?

Connolly: Yes. But he had the local piece of it that he'd like to hand over to us, and hand over those clients. We explained to him that the law says we supplement. We're not going to take over the school system or anything else. We':re just supplementing those gaps where there is no existing service money available.

Shearer: You did work very hard for the establishment of the regional centers, that concept. Has it proved to be a dream come true?

Connolly: In many ways it has. For my personal money, there was one major mistake, which we told other states about and they have not made, and which we can't seem to get corrected here. Soon after the regional centers were established, a guardianship law was established. Herma Hill Kay led a team with the Family Law Connolly: Project at Boalt Hall which produced a paper: "Legal Planning for the Mentally Retarded: The California Experience," which has a tremendous amount of information in it on the obstacles to good service which could be removed through legal action and honoring the law. It was published in the California Law Review in March, 1972.

The State Director of Developmental Services--no, State Department of Health, it was--was supposed to be the guardian. They have delegated the authority of guardianship to the regional centers. Now, here's the regional centers, making the diagnosis if it needs to be--or getting the diagnostic material together at least--making a decision on where the client's going, and you appeal to the regional center if you don't like the decision.

Shearer: And getting the money., or managing the money, on behalf of the client?

Connolly: Right. And it's a total, ridiculous, conflict of interest. When it was going to be done out of Sacramento, the concept was that it was going to be a separate agency, that would be a guardianship agency that would check on clients. There are too many stories still going around of inappropriate placement of clients. So I had my daughter's guardianship with the regional center, because I didn't want my sons to have that responsibility. I think they've contributed enough to Anne. But my younger son said "Forget it," and he went and arranged to become my daughter's legal guardian.

Shearer: He didn't trust the management of the operation?

Connolly: No, no.

Shearer: There's a very critical article which I found, unfortunately after I sent that batch of clippings to you. "State ~ospital's Care of Retarded Termed a Disgrace," but the source of the criticism is the Little Hoover Commission. It also criticized the regional centers. [Quoting from article] "Were singled out for scathing criticism by the commission, which charged that as private corporations, they are not adequately supervised by the State Department of Health."* They also mention this conflict of interest. And then there's a rather extensive reply.

*''State Hospitals' Care of Retarded Termed Disgrace." Sacramento Bee, December 6, 1977, p. 1. Connolly: Well, and that's true. That is the second greatest weakness. There is no accountability! The ten years that Aid Retarded Citizens operated the Golden Gate Regional Center, the ARC board appointed a subboard that managed Golden Gate Regional Center. Well, that meant that there were parents throughout Aid Retarded Citizens who were looking at what was going on.

We had a very complete appeals process that went right back to the Aid Retarded Citizens' board. We divested ourselves of the regional center--and we had planned that carefully for some years--because we felt it was inappropriate for a San Francisco agency to be running a program in Marin and San Mateo (and at one time we had Contra Costa and Alameda), when there were ARC'S in those areas. And we felt it was better, since the regional center was buying services from us.

That was another problem with us. All the time that we ran the regional center, we did not--not all the time, but for the first five years, until we worked out a very formal procedure-- we did not accept any money from the Golden Gate Regional Center for our clients. There was one regional center that was managed by an ARC like ours, where their whole program was financed by the regional center. At the end of a couple of years--

Shearer: They just passed it from one hand to the other hand.

Connolly: That's right, that's right. But at least our board demanded accountability. It was strong enough, and it had enough parents on it. In my estimation, the boards I see around the state, now that they are free-standing centers for the most part, are selected by the staff. The board members! And there is no accountability anyplace. The parents who are on the board are parents who are getting services from the regional center, and they're not going to rock the boat.

No, there is no adequate supervision. And Lanterman was conscious of this, and was still volunteering, after he retired from the legislature. He was talking to consumers and to legi- slative staff and I think had the intention of testifying regarding improvements. It was his intention to do some work on it, but he died rather quickly.

Shearer: His legislation in 1969 and 1970 did provide for the creation of the area board, which sounds as though it would take in more than simply the clients who would be served by a particular regional center. Or would it be the same boundaries?

Connolly: Same boundaries, yes. There may be area boards in the state that take in more than one regional center. Yes, that's right, because when we divested ourselves of Contra Costa and Alameda--we felt it was getting too big, and it was ineffectual and needed another-- the area board still takes the East Bay Regional Center & Golden Gate. Shearer: All right. Now here my information says that the area boards are appointed by the governor and the county supervisors. So it is rooted in the county, it's true. Then there was the State Developmentally Disabled Planning and Advisory Council of fifteen members, again appointed by the governor, with consumers, providers, and some public members.

Connolly: I have mixed feelings about the effectiveness of the State Advisory Board. I think.that so much has depended on who is the chairman. Just until recently, a gal named Deborah Kaplan--whom I don't know, but I think she's from Oakland--was the chairman. I thought the board was doing some really good things; really strong, fascinating things.

They tend more to look at issues like guardianship. Sterilization has beenjust a big, big question. They develop policies for the state on these questions. They've -not been a place where you can go with complaints about the regionalcenters.

Shearer: Is that because they're too removed from the centers?

Connolly: I don't know, I think maybe they don't see their role that way. I really don't know. And the State Advisory Board, as I say, has been very weak at times, and then good again, depending, I really think, on a few key people.

Shearer: There must not be much continuity then. Although in your case, my goodness, you've been on the scene now since the fifties, which is thirty-five years.

Connolly: Well, you know, when I was working at Aid Retarded Citizens I used to try to get people together. I finally decided that maybe continuity is in people and not in groups, not in agencies. I was always going around getting people matched up for tasks, and then we were through. I worked very hard on the establishment of the Community Rehabilitation Workshop in San Francisco, and got them then to accept the mildly retarded clients that we had been taking and we felt weren't appropriately placed in our agency. They didn't need that stigma of mental retardation; they were not noticeably retarded. They were slow, or needed special help, and they had a very good unit there in the Community Rehabilitation Workshop and did a great job. I don't know what they're doing now.

I really don't know. I think that's why I say I'd like to write a book on community organization. Maybe I'd answer my own questions.

Shearer: Well, it sounds as though that's largely what your responsibility and where your particular strengths seem to be manifested. Bringing people together. 8 8 Connolly: Well, the parents are the only pure advocates. They are the ones that can stand up and say outrageous things, sometimes. One year we had a president of Aid Rebarded Citizens who had two retarded sons, and he was a Methodist minister, Reverend Robert Craver. Whenever I'd get him to go to Sacramento to testify, I always persuaded him to wear a Roman collar to make it real clear. And then he'd get up and say, "I'm the parent of two retarded sons," and everybody would listen. You know, it makes all the difference in the world.

We had a couple of people who were kind of rabble-rousers, but they were clear, and honest, and concerned about their kids. So I think the parents have been very effective, but somehow they've been co-opted by the system, they're not effective now.

Shearer: Because they sit on management boards which oversee the money?

Connolly: I don't know, maybe that's part of it, but I think a large part of it is having the money come to the regional center. Young parents. don't know what it was like before, and don't know that that money could disappear overnight., Really, it could. And they don't see the need to be alert to what's going on, to how the money is being spent. They kind of accept things as part of the bureaucracy.

I have a personal gripe, if you will, with Golden Gate Regional Center, which moved after it became independent into a building where they have two floors. The Center is now occupying a highrise where they are paying rent that an oil company said was too expensive for the company. I just think it's a disgrace. I think it's shocking, and I have talked to board members, and they say, "Oh, yes, we shouldn't be doing that,'' and that's the end of it. So I'll leave it alone.

But this is one of the things I think the state ought to be looking at. The state says that: "Oh, well, rental space is expensive in San Francisco." But you know, we don't need fancy offices. That doesn't prove anything.

Shearer: It's hard, though, to know when to blow the whistle.

Connolly: That's right. But they've just cut back on some services, and then they pay this rent, I just find it unconscionable.

'About the regional centers, if you do have time to talk to Edgar Pye, he has written a lot on them, and his papers are very good, and he has been invited around the country to talk. He was the director of Golden Gate from its inception, although he resigned when I retired. Shearer : Pye, Edgar--

Connolly: Pye, P-Y-E. Lives just up the street here.

Shearer: Oh. Is he an attorney, did you say?

Connolly: No, he's a social worker. He was the director of Golden Gate Regional Center when ARC had the contract. Before that he was with the State 'Department of Mental Health.

Cooperation and Competition Among Client Groups

Shearer: You mentioned that you collaborated with the cerebral palsy group, establishing a facility that served both clienteles. You and I talked earlier about the competition that naturally exists among these various clienteles for scarce dollars. Perhaps some of it has to do with getting a handle on the cause, getting a handle on the cure. So it's not just competition for dollars, but competing philosophies.

Connolly: You mean in the habilitation and--

Shearer: Yes, in the habilitation and treatment, and the approach they take in the various groups. How did you manage to work through that? Does it exist?

Connolly: I'm not sure I'm following you. Are you saying that other agencies think in terms of cure, and people going out and getting out of the agency or--

Shearer: Well, if there are X number of dollars available, and the parents of cerebral palsied children, who do not need necessarily any academic help, want the emphasis on mechanical and orthopedic devices. The people who are involved in the treatment of alcoholism have a different sense of what is needed; and on mental illness, and neurological disabilities, and autism, and so on. There's some overlap in the causes of these disabilities, but not completely.

Connolly: Of course, you know the way the regional centers developed was-- first of all, I think, we just thought in terms of mental retardation, and we went after what we could get. And I do remember, many years ago, Squire Behrens--Earl Behrens--from the Chronicle, was the dean, as you know, of the newsmen in Sacramento, and an old friend. I think it was during Goodwin Knight's admini- stration--it was a long time ago--there was some crunch in the Connolly: budget, and I said, "We really need this program, but I just have a feeling that we shouldn't push too hard." He said, "DO you really need the program? It's somebody else's concern where the money's coming from, and who gets what. You go after what you're after.I1

I said, "Oh, great, you're right, of course. Why should I be worrying about the budget? That will take care of itself in time." So, years later when we had the regional centers going, I ran into him someplace, and he said, "What are you doing up here?" And I said, "Oh, I was seeing Mr. Lanterman about something." (Something was coming up. I really don't remember what it was.) He said, "You people get me. You're really so greedy. You want everything, don't you? You want the moon and the stars."

I said, "squire. Do you remember standing here and telling me-- " He said, "Did I say that?" I said, "I've been working on your premise all these years."

So, that was one thing. So when we got what we were after, largely because in the early days nobody else wanted us, so we just went after it, then the other groups said, "The mentally retarded have gotten ahead of us," and that is how the regional centers inherited all the developmental disabilities. Of course, now they cover cerebral palsy, and neurological deficit, and autism, and epilepsy, and related conditions.

Shearer: Is that why the 1969 act by Lanterman was rewritten? It was simply to expand the definition?

Connolly: Right, that's one reason, yes. It had to conform to the national legislation, too. They were hoping at that time to get some federal money, and I don't think they ever have. But they've pretty much conformed. I don't think they're conforming right now, because the federal Developmental Disabilities Act keeps changing its definition, and I don't think California and the federal government have the same definition now. But they did expand it in the East Coast, in Washington, as a result of many pressures from these many groups who wanted the same kind of a management/treatment center.

Shearer: If there was any jockying for a position, it would have taken place be.fore 1967, when the regional centers were first established.

Connolly: That's right. I don't think the other groups really understood the concept or knew what was happening. There wasn't much concern about it. I think it was in place before anybody really knew what was going on. Shearer: Except for the cerebral palsy group?

Connolly: Well, I don't think they did particularly, either. They began lobbying, of course, to get in.

See, one of the problems with cerebral palsy, do you remember their early signs, showing a very handicapped child for their fund drive, that said, "I'm not mentally retarded"? That was used for years, and it just sunk into their consciousness. They didn't want any part of us. They would be "tainted" by us. And the only reason in San Francisco they got involved with us at all in Touchstone was that they had a handful of mentally retarded adults who had been in a state hospital most of their lives, and who had been placed out in hotels--one on Stockton Street and one on Sutter Street--and who had nothing to do, and who really were mildly retarded. So there was a lot of pressure from their board to do something about these people who were just hanging around the streets. There was one woman in a wheelchair. So with the exception of that woman in the wheelchair, the others were all mentally retarded, really. But they didn't want to talk about it. They just wanted to call them cerebral palsied. The gal in the wheelchair wrote beautiful poetry--she was really quite gifted--and she went on to another program.

I don't know, I think there might have been more tension on the federal level than there was on the state level among these groups. VI RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PREVENTION AND TREATMENT

Shearer: Let's see. I guess I'll give you the last word. Or words. Do you want to say anything about how you think we're doing, now, in the treatment of the mentally retarded, in the enhancement of life's possibilities? What kind of a report card would you give them? What would you like to say that hasn't been,said?

Connolly: There was one thing that really isn't on that point, that I really must comment on. In November of 1973, I got an invitation signed by Governor Reagan to a conference on prevention in San Diego. It was the most elaborate affair. It was two or three days and we were provided living quarters, and a conference ground. The first night, John Wayne paid for a very elaborate cocktail party, and it was really quite a do. For three days, they talked about the most obscure, remote diseases that might cause mental retardation you ever heard of. And any time anybody would say, "What about poverty?" and "What about hunger?" and 11What about drugs?"--oh, no no no, they were talking about phenylketonuria, and hydrocephalus, and this, that, and the other thing. They had fine speakers, but it was a very limited thing. And after it was all wrapped up, I realized the way it was handled in the promotion, and the reports and everything, that it was Earl Brian launching his campaign to be governor of California--and then sending this out to all the parents of mentally retarded kids to show a great interest--because he was the conference chairman. They had color television pictures of him, and it was just--it was the funniest conference I'd ever been at in my life.

Shearer: Very interesting. And all focused on prevention, nothing on taking care of the people who are here already.

Connolly: Yes, all on prevention. And that's how you could save money, if you could prevent all this stuff. Which is true, because we could prevent a large number if we did all the things that we know already to do with poverty and malnutrition. So I think then, in answer to your original question, that this is the thing we Connolly: don't do, the things we know how to do already. If we had good prenatal care for everybody, you could prevent millions of dollars spent on defective kids. If you had good nutrition for everybody, you could prevent thousands of retarded and developmentally disabled kids being born. If we had decent day care centers, we could prevent much of the damage that's done emotionally. And it we gave mothers a chance to be with their children, and the education that they need with their children, there's so much we could do.

Diagnostically, I think we're superb. We really can separate out the differential diagnoses; really, that's high skill. There's very good work done in genetic testing in prenatal life. I know when one of mysons was engaged to be married I went quickly and had Anne and myself tested. But it was, as the doctors had thought at the time, a virus. My sons had chicken pox when I was pregnant, and they think that's what it was. But the genetic testing is available, and it's good, and the regional center will pay for it.

I think we've given practically no attention to the fact that with antibiotics, the mentally retarded are living long lives. And if you walk through the tenderloin, it's full of mentally retarded people over sixty years of age, who are living in those hotels. They get their money stolen from them, or they don't know how to manage their money. Somebody should be supervising them to the extent of knowing that they eat properly, and that they are getting the help that they may need.

Some of the programs that some of these clients are in, the funding only goes to sixty-four years of age. And nobody's looking at what's going to happen to these people after they're sixty-four. The operators of board and care homes are horribly underpaid, and unfortunately they are largely uneducated people, many black and Hispanic people, and they really don't understand how to get a lobby to get themselves properly paid. They go to Sacramento themselves, and the legislators see that as self- serving, that they're just trying to get more money.

Some years ago, a board and care operator showed me her ,books, showed me everything, and she was earning about thirty cents an hour, caring for six mentally retarded men.

Shearer: And working hard?

Connolly: That's right. You want responsible people in those jobs. You know, there's no provision made for a board and care operator to have a vacation, there's no provision made for her to have a day off. And there are many things that could be done with families of the mentally retarded, the same way the regional centers will Connolly: pay for respite care, if you want to leave your child someplace for a week or two. But they've now cut the amount of time you may have to something like ten days a year, with the latest budget crunch. Well, if somebody's sick, or that sort of thing, it's impossible to do it on that small amount of time.

So we've come a long way, but we have a tremendous amount to do. One of the things that intrigues me about it is that the more we do for mentally retarded people, the more we see the need to do for the aged, for physically handicapped, and for children in general. If we raise the standards for the mentally retarded children then maybe we'll raise them for all our kids. You know, it's one step at a time, but it seems very slow some days. It takes so long, and then you go back every once in a while two or three steps.

But all in all, I think it's healthier now the way we talk about mental retardation, and the way we accept it. And I hope we get to that point with mental illness, because mental illness is really lagging way behind in their services, especially for children.

Shearer: It doesn't sound as though you've retired.

Connolly: I'm happy to say I've been working on a thing with Judge William Hanlon as a result of--the school system was sued for not providing classes for a severely emotionally disturbed child. Judge Hanlon, who's the judge of juvenile court, is trying to get a program worked out. Because the federal judge on the case wants it worked out without his having to decide it; he said to the litigants, "Why don't you go back and decide how this is going to go."

So, out of this we felt we needed some legislation, and we got a bill introduced by Willie Brown, AB3632. This would mandate that the directors of the Departments of Social Services, Mental Health, and Education (Educati0n.i~outside the governor's office and never is part of the meetings there) all must work together on a plan which will go on down to the counties for collaborative work with emotionally disturbed children. Through testing of children suspected to be at risk (who show signs of extreme hyperactivity, destructive or suicidal behavior), they think they can get a handle on how many such children there are in the state, and what is needed for them and begin to develop services for them.

Even though we were told bluntly by the Department of Finance, and most state department heads, and everybody that they'd all written the governor and had advised against his signing it, he did sign it. We were all geared up to do another two years of argument, and we were just astonished that he signed it. &earer: You mean our governor--

.ly: Our Governor Deukmejian signed it--and it was Willie Brown's bill, which was another negative, although Milton Marks had worked on it and helped to split it. I asked Senator Marks why the governor signed it. I said, "I've been giving you the credit." And he said, "I haven't the foggiest notion," [laughing].

Shearer: Do you suppose he just made a mistake?

Connolly: That was my first reaction. But anyhow, so at least that's one more step forward.

[staff member enters]

Shearer: Oh, I think we're past our time.

Connolly: Our time is up. No, no, we're all through.

Shearer: Thank you very much.

Connolly : You' re welcome.

Transcriber: Serena Herr Final Typist: Shannon Page TAPE GUIDE -- Margarete Connolly

Date of Interview: November 29, 1984 tape 1, side a tape 1, side b tape 2, side a tape 2, side b tape 3, side a tape 3, side b INDEX -- Margarete Connolly

Adult Vocational Program, 24-27 Christian, Winslow, 32 Agnews State Hospital, 13 Commission on Staffing Standards, 37 Aid Retarded Children (see- Connolly, Anne Mary, 2-3, 6, 8, 53 Association for Retarded Connolly , Margaret e Agnes Malone, Citizens) passim Aid Retarded Citizens (see- Connolly, Paul Martin, 2 Association for Retarded Connolly, William Nicholas, 2, 13-15 Citizens) Connolly, William Phillip, 2 Anspacher, Carolyn, 14-15, 18 Association for Retarded Dahl, Walter, 17 Citizens, 4-15, 17-27, 40, Davis, Patty, 36-37 42, 53, 55-56 Davis, Pauline, 22-23 Auerback, Alfred, 45 Dent, Harold, 25 Deukmej ian, George, 62-63 Battaglia, Philip M., 37 Developmental Disabilities, Office of, Bee, Carlos, 17, 27 4 3 Behrens, Earl. (Squire) , 57 Developmentally Disabled Planning and Belotti, Frank, 27 Advisory Council, 55 Benet, James, 14-15 Dinkelspiel, Mrs. Martin, 30 Beyer, Maybell, 11 Donahoe, Dorothy, 17, 22-23, 27-28, 33 Beyer, Nicholas, 11 Down's syndrome, 2-3 Blaine, Daniel, 4, 28-29, 34 Doyle, Donald, 17 Bonaparte, Benjamin, 12-13 Dunbar, Pat, 19 Brian, Earl, 60 Dunbar, Walter, 19 Brown, Edmund G., Senior (pat), Dybwad, Gunnar, 38, 40-41 24, 28-29, 32, 42 Brown, Willie, 27, 31, 63 East Bay Regional Center, 54 Burton, Phillip, 27-28 Education, San Francisco Department of, 7 California Assembly Interim Subcommittee on Severely Finance, Department of, 42 Mentally Retarded (of the Francois, Terry, 31 Education Committee), 17, 23, French, John, 10 33 French, Rosemary, 4, 10 California Assembly Ways and Means Committee, 27, 31, 34 Geddes, Ernest, 17 California Council of Retarded Golden Gate Regional Center, 49, 52-54, Citizens (CCRC), 18-19 56-5 7 California Senate Business and Go ldman, William, 8-9 Professional Committee, 41 Ggvernor's Conference on Mental Health California Senate Interim Com- (February 3 and 4, 1949), 12-13 mittee on Education and Re- habilitation of Handicapped Halpin, Jack, 29-30, 34 Children and Adults, 27 Hanlon, William, 62 Catholic Theater Guild, 1-2 Health, Department of, 32-33, 53 Health and Welfare Agency, 32, 40 Mental Health Advisory Board, San Herrick, Helen, 4-5, 11 Francisco County, 45-46 Hoffman, Helen, 10-11 Mental Hygiene, Department of, 4, Homewood Terrace, 12 37, 40 Hume, Portia Bell, 21-23, 45 mental retardation, 2-3 mental retardation, causes of, 29-30, Independent Living Rehabilitation 60-62 Program. -See Adult Vocational mental retardation, organizations for, Program 4-8, 12, 17-19, 32-33, 53-57, 59 Information Center for Parents of mental retardation legislation, 13, Mentally Retarded Children, 4 17-19, 21-22, 24, 27-29, 58, 61-63 Institutions, California Department mental retardation, programs for, 7-10, of, 12, 32 19, 21, 24-27, 33-34, 59 Mental Retardation, President's Committee John Adams Adult School, 50 on, 12 Mikkelson, Bank, 38, 40 Kaplan, Deborah, 55 Miller, George, Senior, 23, 31 Kay, Herma Hill, 52-53 Morrison, Jack, 30 Katz, Eli, 25 Moscone, George, 27-28, 31, 34, 37 Kerson, George, 10 Knight, Goodwin, 27 National Association for Retarded Kopp, Quentin, 40-41 Children (see- National Association for Retarded Citizens) Langley-Porter Psychiatric National Association for Retarded Institute, 3 Citizens, 6 Lanterman, Frank, 23, 27, 31, 34, Nelson, Nathan, 24 42, 54 Lanterman Mental Retardation Services Phillips, Irving, 21, 41 Act of 1969, 20, 31, 42, 49, 58 Post, Alan, 34, 36 Lanterman-Petris-Short Act of 1967, Press, Harry, 14 29 Pye, Edgar, 5, 56-57 Lawford, Patricia Kennedy, 30 Levi Strauss 6 Company, 25 Rappaport, Walter , 5 Licensing, Bureau of, 35, 39 Reagan, Ronald (as governor), 32, 34, Lions Club of San Francisco, 9 36, 39, 44, 46-48, 60 Lippman, Leo, 29-30 Reagan, Ronald (as president), 36 Lombard, Louise, 7 regional centers, 30-31, 33, 42-43, Lowry, James, 40-41, 43-44 49, 52-59 Rehabilitation, Department of, 29, McAteer, J. Eugene, 30-31 33, 47-48 McBride, James, 17, 27-28, 33-34 Rehabilitation Advisory Board, 46 Malone, Martin James, 1 Retarded Children, California Council Malone, Theresa O'Rourke, 1 for (see ~etardedCitizens, California Malone, Tommy, 27 Council for) Margarete Connolly Education Retarded Citizens, California Council Center, 49-52 for, 11 Marks, Milton, 41, 63 Rogers, Roy, 43 Marrin, Andrew, 24, 26, 48 Rosenblatt , Irving, 18, 45-46 media, 2, 13-16, 18, 24, 39, 43 Me11inkof f , Ab e, 14 San Francisco Foundat ion, 25 San Francisco, Mental Health Association, 21 San Francisco Press Club, 13 San Francisco State College, 10 Schafer, Phillip, 24 Schapps, Myra, 25 Shiman, Clara, 10 Shiman, Martin, 10 Short, Alan, 21-22, 30-31, 40-42, 45 Short, Mrs. Alan, 3 Short-Doyle Act of 1957, 17-23, 29, 33, 37-38, 45-46 Social Welfare, Department of, 35-36 social work, San Francisco Bureau of, 39 Sonoma State Hospital, 7, 35, 37-42, 50 Stockton State Hospital, 12-13 Stubblebine, J. M., 44-45 Study Commission on Mental Retardation (1963), 29 Sullivan, Barry, 43 Susselman, Samuel, 3

Tallman, Frank, 4-5, 13 Tarallo, Frances, 11 Tarallo, Lou, 11 Tarjan, George, 12-13, 21 Touchstone Vocational Center, 49-52, 59

University of California, Berkeley, School of Social Welfare, 5-6

Varsity Club Blind Babies Foundation, 12 Vine V5llage Residence, 10

Waldie, Jerome, 28-31, 33, 42 Walton, Roger, 19 Warren, Charles, 43 Warren, Earl, 12-13, 32, 36 Warren, Stafford, 12-13 Wayne, John, 60 Williams, Howard, 19 Williams, Spencer, 32, 40-44 Wilson, Gertrude, 5

Regional Oral History Office University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California

Government History Documentation Project Ronald Reagan Gubernatorial Era

Carolyn Cooper Heine

BUILDING A BASIS FOR CHANGE: CALIFORNIA'S COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN

An Interview Conducted by Sarah Sharp in 1984

Copyright @ 1987 by the Regents of the University of California

TABLE OF CONTENTS -- Carolyn Cooper Heine

INTERVIEW HISTORY

BRIEF BIOGRAPHY

I CHILDHOOD AND WORKING AT USC LAW SCIIOOL

I1 ADVISORY COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN, 1967-1973 Working with a New Governor and Relations with Former Commissioners; Establishing Credentials with the Legislature The Commission's 1969 Recommendations: Child Care and Education as Priorities Changing Legislators' Perception of the Commission to Gain Permanent Status in 1971; California Legislative Roundtable On to the ERA and Women's Civil Rights in 1972: The liecessity of Timing It Right Working with Local Women's Commissions, Other Organizations in the Community, and the Legislature; Additional Notes on Child Care and Education Issues Changes in Protective Labor Laws: The Role of Charles Warren and Organized Labor Women and "Women's Issues"; The Divorce Reform Bill, 1969 The Commission's Relationship with the Governor's Office; The Task of Raising the Consciousness of California's Girls and Women

TAPE GUIDE

AIvPENDIX: Selected pages from the "Report on the Advisory Commission on the Status of Women," 1969

INDEX

INTERVIEW HISTORY

The following interview with Carolyn Heine discusses her work as executive director of the California Commission on the Status of Women during the administration of o over nor Ronald Reagan. It is an important commentary on establishing credibility for the newly formed commission in the early years of the women's movement.

Ms. Heine came to Sacramento on the recommendation of Reagan's first executive secretary, Pnil Battaglia, with whom she had worked closely at the University of Southern California Law School.

She recalls that neither she nor Reagan's appointees on the commission were feminists in 1967 and that they were well aware that the administration expected to cut back on the number of advisory boards and commissions. Realistically, she and the commissioners set about educating themselves and the legislature about non-controversial issues such as women in the work force. In her analysis, neither women nor legislators in those days wanted to be told that women had problems.

Although Ms. Heine had not had previous governmental experience, her description of achieving\permanentstatus for the commission in 1971 reflects thorough understanding of the political process. So does her recognition that the women's commission was "very low on the priority list of things that I think the Reagan administration wanted to achieve." In 1973, when feminism became more activist, urgfng legislation on many issues at once, Ms. Heine decided to leave the commission, and returned to USC.

The interview was recorded on July 9, 1984, in Ms. Heine's office at the University of Southern California. Dr. Sarah Sharp of the project staff did the research for and conducted the interview. When the lightly edited transcript of the conversation was sent to her for review, Ms. Heine reviewed it carefully and added several paragraphs to clarify questions asked by the editor.

Gabrielle Morris Project Director

August 1986 Regional Oral Bistory Office 486 The Bancroft Library University of Cali'forni'a at Berkeley Regional Oral P.istory Office University of California Room 486 The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California 94720

BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

(Please print or write clearly)

Your full name C-lYn -Per Heh

Date of birth ~~ 22, 1930 Place of birth Se~~Jdo,California

Father's full name Cecil Markin -Per

Birthplace 'Ikmssee

Occupation Cha&cal/P&taluryical En-r

Mother's full name Matilda Ridmrdson -per

Birthplace Texas

Occupation hmmaker

Where did you grow up ? El Segundo, Calif. until 13 years 0- ~nsmes

Present community LoS Angeles

Education through one year of university

Special interests or activities history, literature, classiml mjr: I CHILDHOOD AND WORKING AT USC LAW SCHOOL [Interview 1: July 9, 19841ilil

Sharp: You might just start by talking a bit about your parents, and what kinds of influence they might have been for you. Then we can go on from there.

Heine: Fine. They were both people who were mission- and issue-oriented. They're Westerners. For instance, my father's father was a Eugene V. Debs Socialist who came west to make a new world in New Mexico. My father, then, in antipathy to that (so very often, the next generation, you know, becomes the opposite), was really quite conser- vative. But he was always looking for answers to the major cosmic questions. He embraced those movements called Technocracy, I think it was, for a while and also Moral Rearmament; they concerned them- selves with things that would produce fundamental and lasting kinds of things they hope$ would be beneficial for the world.

My mother loved higher math as one of her hobbies. She had been a school teacher as a young woman before her marriage. She taught in a one-room school in Silver City, Arizona. She was ambivalent about women's roles. She believed women should be beautiful and desirable, should marry well and be good wives, but on the other hand, she believed women were oppressed and they should stand up for themselves, have careers and be someone important.

So, I was very much a product of that ambivalence. Looking back on my life, it's easy for me to see how, you know, I was able to become

##This symbol indicates that a tape or a segment of a tape has begun or ended. For a guide to the tapes see page 37. Heine: concerned in something like the cause of women in spite of the fact that the result fox me, coming from such mission-oriented people, was that I then tended to be an extremist about moderation,

I just thought that nobody should rock the boat and that you could achieve your ends much better by consensus, and by getting middle of the road and establishing agreement, that this was a much sounder way to go about doing things. It just sort of fit my personality. .

I saw that neither of my parents had been able to be very successful in their more extreme--not that they were radicals by any means-- but, I mean, they were allied with things which were really going to turn things upside down, so to speak. In her later years, my mother became a member of the John Birch Society. We just had to cease talking to her about politics at that point.

Sharp: I've had some of those non-conversations myself.

Heine: So, I very much came out to be, as I say, an extremist of the middle-- because I cannot claim to be neutral about that. I do know that, looking at history, very extreme things have often been necessary down through all the centuries. But, in this case, I didn't think that would achieve anything good.

Sharp: Was there one particular point when you became interested in women's issues?

Heine: No, I couldn't have been said to be interested in women's issues at all. I was, before I went up to Sacramento, the classical loop- hole woman.

I was like the great white mother of the USC [University of Southern California] law school. There were five hundred men there a day, and I was just adored by all those people because I gave away jobs and scholarships, and I was practically the only woman in the building. I was very warmly addred and highly thought of. I had just the classical, "Well, if I can be successful, so can everybody else," attitude. I sort of enjoyed being an exception.

The very first task1 saw when I went to Sacramento was that my own consciousness needed a lot of raising. But that was good, because then I was able to see what would have to go on in the minds of others like me. So that turned out to be useful.

Sharp: How did you get into the position at the law school?

Heine: Well, at a certain point, I wanted to go back to work after my children were born and to help with the family income. There was a job opening in the law school as executive secretary to the dean Heine: of the law school, Robert Kingsley. So, I did that for about six months and then was promotedtobeing placement director and scholar- ship officer. Those programs didn't exist in those days, but I saw that I could develop them, and the dean said, "Go do it."

That put me in very close touch with a lot of people wi5o later became very important. Judges and people in government and politics. One of these was Philip Battaglia, a leading student and later eraduate of the law school who became campaign manager for Ronald Reagan. Phil and I had worked together when he was student body president. I assisted him in getting his first law position and later saw to it that he got on the board of directors of the Law Alumni Association. I just thought that he was a very sound and fine person. And still think so.

On assignment from hfs law firm, he took on this position to be campaign manager. It wasn't his idea to do that. After the election he was offered the posftion as chief of staff to the governor, and came, as a matter of fact, and sought me out as his long-time coun- selor about whether from a career point of view it would be wise for him to accept the position. I urged him to do that under the heading that, well, one doesn't get unique positions and unique chances like that, and it would be foolish not to. I thought he could make a fine contribution there.

When he asked me about whether I'd like to come and be part of their team in some way or other, we went through the book to see what I might like to do. So, really it was by sort of "search and see what's available" rather than, "Gee, I'd like to go do something for women." I just thought that this was something which I could be competent to do. There were many other positions I didn't know anything about or how to go about them. At least I know about being a woman, and some of the other areas I know nothing about at all. I1 ADVISORY COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN, 1967-1973

Working with a New Governor and Relations with Former Commissioners; Establishing Credentials with the Legislature

Sharp: Did you know anything about the commission?

Heine: No, I'd never heard of it. It had only been in existence in California for two years.

Sharp: I have spoken with Marian Ash just a little about it because she had been--

Heine: Yes, she was my predecessor, right.

Sharp: Maybe we can just start talking about the commission because I'm interested in what the transition was like from Marian to you, how the work went, and what that transition period was like.

Heine: It was a little tense. I think there was a feeling on the part of the predecessor commissioners and Mrs. Ash (who became a very good friend of urine, by the way, later on) that the commission would have been abolished had it not just been sort of a fluke. They thought that the new people appointed to it and myself were staunch Reagan supporters who would either try to squelch it, or do totally innocuous things with it and limit it very narrowly.

I believe they felt that, and I was feeling my way very carefully at the beginning there, so I certainly did nothing but make them more suspicious. I just felt that it was very, very important to move carefully with a new governor and a new legislature, and that if the result was the initial enmity of the original commissioners and Mrs. Ash, well, I guess we had to risk that in order to try to do something with the commission after laying careful groundwork.

The governor and his people, when he first went to Sacramento, were saying loud and clear that they intended to abolish as many boards Heine: and commissions as possible. There were going to be tremendous cuts-- cut, squeeze, and trim, as you may recall. In my early days of talking with legislators, I heard over and over again, particularly from the Republicans, that we needed drastically to reduce the number of our boards and commissions. "While this commission has managed to continue its life for two more years, surely it will be able to tell us anything that needs to be said in two more years, having had two years to tell us all about this matter already."

That really was the tenor of the times there. It was true at least as much in the consciousness of Democrats, even though they didn't talk that way. But certainly the Republicans said that just absolutely outright. So that was the situation going in.

There was certainly considerable feeling on the part of the governor's office and the Republicans in the legislature that the original commission appointed by Democratic Governor Edmund Brown, Sr., had been very women's-rights oriented, that women didn't have problems. That as a matter of fact--it's hard to remember these attitudes,that are now so antediluvian--but it really was common belief among even people I thought were liberals, that not only were women not oppressed, but they were privileged--that they had more rights than men. So, it was a very, very difficult atmosphere in which to build credibility for the issues.

When I look now at the 1967 recommendations of the original commission they just seem very, very tame, but at the time, they were received in the legislature as being very strident. As a matter of fact, that commission had been, frankly, in my view, naive. They had read their legislation, the enabling legislation which said the commission should say what the disabilities of women are under the law and should report back to the legislature what that is.

Well, the original commissioners just read that and took it very literally, and told those old boys that women were oppressed--and they didn't want to hear that. I don't know how it is that I came, in the course of my life, to know that .you don't tell people what they don't want to hear unless you have very carefully prepared them for it first.

So there was, I think, a feeling in the legislature that, certainly, none of the 1967 recommendations requiring legislation would be passed. Our commissioners were all new. Those appointed by the governor tended also, like myself at that time, not to know that there were problems for women under the law. Certainly, they weren't going to take the findings of a predecessor commission who were mostly Democrats as the gospel. They would want to read all this themselves. Heine: And an interesting thing in terms of the women's movement itself, historically, that I found very early on, that was important and built on continuously, was that not only homemakers, but middle-class working women did not want to be told that they had problems. It was. a questi~nof your pride. No one likes to be told that they are downtrodden and "Poor you, poor you."

The women on the new comission were proud--.the ones appointed by the governor were proud women and they certainly didn't want to be told that, "goodness, they were dispossessed and oppressed, and poor them." So, I: never did that through the whole time I was there. I never talked about poor, downtrodden women at all. We went at it in an entirely different way.

We were very much misunderstood by women activists when they first came along. I noticed in reading Shirley Biondi's article& some criticism of our report for that very reason. It was wonderful-- there was just the beginnings of groups of young women coming along in about 1970. Now, I don't know how their consciousnesses got raised--certainly not by us, because they were very active, and very critical of us. I was able to make my peace with them so that they came to understand that, by our going up one road and their going up another, we could do more separately. We could get a lot more done if they looked very active and we looked very reasonable.

Sharp: Well, I think that's a real simple part of how the commission did its work.

Heine: Well, later, it was a part. In the first two sessions it wasn't.

In the first two--I'd say from '67 through '71--it was not. There weren't any other women there. When I now give talks about the early days, the name of the talk is "And Everyone Was Brave." Which you may recall was the slogan of the suffragett~s. But there were only two of us: that "everyone" was two. Marian Ash and I were the only people--with one other woman--that were in Sacramento, who were working on this in the first six years.

So, the younger women really didn't come around until about '70 or '71. By then we would have been long dead if we hadn't used this other route.

* See "Women's Commission Faces Funding Struggle," Shirley A. Biondi, -California Journal, March 1971, pages 74-75. Sharp: I'd like to talk about that very closely. It seems like you developed very quickly some expectations of what you thought you should do as executive director of the commission.

Heine: Yes.

Sharp: I'm wondering how you reconciled your role with the chairperson-- the current chairperson--who I think was Betty Concannon.

Heine: You mean the then-?

Sharp: Yes, the chairperson who was there when you became executive director. And how, really, your duties were divided.

Heine: Right. Well, I selected her. This was my arrangement with the governor's office, that I was going to head the commission and that he would tell his commissioners that. And he did, and they were very happy. These were very busy women, and they had no idea what needed to be done. They were very happy to have my leadership. That was the way it was the whole time I was there.

Anita Miller, who became chairperson later--I helped her to get on the commission.

I felt it was just very important that, for the commission to survive, someone who really understood the political climate, someone who understood what you needed to do to achieve things, someone-- people who were not volunteers--needed really, very carefully, to give it direction. And that worked.

Now it was time, when I left, for that to change. There's no question about it, but that was very important: that somebody who had that authority, and who was trusted from the inside, had ideas about it.

Now it is not necessarily true, in terms of the subject matter that we took up, that those were necessarily my ideas. I had no more idea upon arrival than the other commissioners about the content that we should work on. I know it was very important for them to believe in the content at least as much as I.

But the way we were going to go about doing things was what I felt was enormously important to keep under my control. The methods by which we would work, and our posture vis-&is the legislature; our posture vis-A-vis women's groups and so forth. We needed to keep a relatively low profile until we had a report that looked substantive, that looked like it had been professionally carried out, that coincided with what some of the interests were of that legislature and that governor. Heine: Reagan was very, very concerned about the high welfare costs. So it was very, very easy to cast what we were doing in the light of problems about welfare: I11f you don't enable women to care for them- selves and their families, welfare is going to be an inevitable result. "

Sharp: So you made it a part of your argument.

Heine: Absolutely. Absolutely. And so it was all of those kinds of--I would call them political--very sophisticated political and human strategizing that I know was enormously important.

One of the first things I did when I arrived in Sacramento was to go and call on .legislators since the session ended a week after I arrived. I knew there had been hostility on the Republicans' side towards the predecessor commission, so I felt it was very important for me to go and call on the people in the legislature whom I knew. These were USC law graduates who were there. One of them was George Deukmejian, who was not a USC law graduate, but the .man who is now governor had been the law partner of a good friend of mine, and I knew it was very important for me to establish credentials right away: that they had a professional person there, and someone who was going to go about doing things in a different way, and who was going to ask them what they thought needed to be done. I was going to include the legislators themselves: "What do you believe the problems are that we should address ourselves to?"

I just believed that was a very important thing from the very beginning: to establish that credibility. Really sort of like they had a serious researcher from a university on their hands, you see, and not a political activist or not an activist from a cause. Somebody who was really going to try to find out things that would enable themtomaybe propose legislation themselves. I know that one of the problems of legislators is, "My God, what bills am I going to have this year?--I mean, that's what I'm supposed to be doing here, is initiating legislation."

So, I knew that if I could represent that among the things we would do would be research and background information which would help them in knowing whether legislation was needed in a variety of areas, or at least how to vote intelligently because some in-depth studies were done or something, that this would appeal to them where they lived; and that this was how you went about building trust and confidence, and being viewed as a professional colleague. I know that's how you get things done in.the world--as a woman in a man's world.

How I had succeed~dpreviously, you see, was that all those men knew that I was very credible because I did my work very well and was not Heine: personal at all and was not emotional at all. I knew that was what worked with men. When the rubber hit the road, when you had to give out money or jobs or scholarships or whatever, I mean, you really had to have credibility and trust--it was really serious stuff.

So I just put that to work for me again and I knew that would be very important, I knew that those legislators would view these women as tea party girls. I mean, that was the choice: "the tea party girls" or "the strident activists." And I just knew that there was no chance to accomplish anything at all unless we could find a third way.

So, that's really why I felt it was very important to pick a commis- sion chairperson who I knew I would be compatible with, who I felt had the same kind of values that I did, and Betty Concannon was that person.

She was just superb. She was a person who feels very deeply about things; she was very educable; she needed, like I did, her conscious- ness raised, hut we both knew that. And she was a wonan of very considerable strength and presence, but not on an ego or power trip. So, we were able to be quite effective and productive and we came to care deeply about the issues.

Sharp: Sounds like it was a good combination.

Heine: It really was. It worked well.

The Commission's 1969 Recommendations: Child Care and Education as Priorities

Sharp: I thought what we might do in order to find our way into some of the issues, is to just take a look at the 1969 recommendations.*

Heine: Okay.

* See the appendix to this interview for selected pages from the "Report on the Advisory Commission on the Status of Women," for 1969, pages 1-3, 45-47, 64-67, 77-85, which lists the commission's recommendations for 1969. Pages 93 and 94 are included also which list the commission's members. Sharp: They focus heavily on child care, the needs ofmigrantagricultural families, and day care licensing programs. Itm.interested in the final report , those particular words that were written into the report. (And we'll talk about the report as a document.)

Heine: Okay.

Sharp: Then I have some other questions about who read it--you know, where the report went, how exactly it was disseminated, and what its influence was, of course. But maybe you could just tell me about the evolution of the report--how it ended up the way it did.

Heine: The first thing these corrrmissioners did was to read everything under the sun about the issues and all of the work of its predecessor commission.

It seemed that over and over again we read that women said, "Well, before I can worry about being discriminated against, before I can worry about getting a job, before I can worry about any of these things--before I can even go out of my house--I have to get someone to take care of my children."

For whatever reasons, a great deal of the background information happened to be fromwomen who had children. Iguessmost working women do have children.

So, they said, "This is our most pressing problem. We're not going to worry right now about whether we get promoted to be president of the company, for goodness sake. We don't have any place to leave our children. Which means we're always losing our job when they're sick or goodness knows what."

This came up over and over and over again, which is a prime reason why that committee was selected to be one of the four committees of the commission.

We broke up into four committees. One was the child care committee; one was education; one was employment.

The fourth was community involvement, which was something the governor was very interested in, and a close colleague of his was a member of the conunission, Kathleen Finucane, who wanted to head that up. Nothing really evolved about that and so you probably didn't read much about that as a cormittee. But woven throughout the whole theme of things was, "We need to get communities involved in these issues." il il Heine: We saw then, that at least from the point of view of women themselves, they were--and this, I think, really is true, looking back on where the consciousness of most women in California was in 1967--they were really not concerned about upward mobility, being company presidents, all of these things. Women, moreso in that time, needed to work from economic necessity. It was very much a bread-and-butter thing. There were, of course, a few women who wanted to rise, but the bulk of those women who needed to work really had, very much, the bread- and-butter problem of care for their children.

We were faced with an administration and a legislature to which the fact that the state had any association with child care came as a great shock--remember, the legislature turned over in 1966, and was predominantly new people, so these were not knowledgeable people to a great extent--I remember going to a committee hearing in which a new legislator asked, "What in the world is the state doing in the baby-sitting business at all?" The only thing there was at that time was the California Children's Centers Program, which was very small. And even then there was talk of doing away with that because "What in the world was the state doing in the baby-sitting business?"

So, we saw that if women were going to be enabled to even get into the work force in the first place, we really needed to tackle this. We gave that a very high priority and we also saw how the commission should present the issue, woven into thewelfare question which would get the attention of those Republicans by saying, "Look, if you don't want these women to be on welfare for eighteen years, and their children to learn that as a way of life, then you have to equip these women to work. You have to do something about child care so that they can work. You have to deal with this issue."

We just saw that as really starting from where the bottom was ; just starting from where everybody really was. The fact that there were some civil rights matters involved--I mean some women's civil rights matters--seemed to us less important at that point in time. We knew that we couldn't win any of those at that time.

I tested the waters. None of those legislators felt that women's civil rights were in any way, shape, or form abridged. No way. You couldn't convince them of that at all.

I remember telling one of the most liberal of the Republicans that there were a bunch of disenfranchised women in California who literally could-ndt vote because of the domicile laws. (If your husband at that point in time left you and moved across town or to some other part of the state, if you wanted to vote, you had to go' where he was, because the domicile law said that your place of residence was where your husband lived.) And this liberal legislator Heine: said, "You certainly wouldn't want to take up the time of the legis- lature with putting a law though for only a few women, would you?"

That was the attitude at that time about anythhg to do with-women.

Sharp: That it took up too much time.

Heine: Certainly anything to do with their civil rights did. We couldn't have won anything then.

It was very apparent: that if anything was going to happen for women, they were going to have to do it themselves. And so we really had to get women educated, and women's chi'ldren taken care of so that they could get their minds out of the tea kettle, and get used to being breadwinners and not keep leaving--coming to the work force and leaving and so forth.

There was this terrible cycle--of women trapped in these low-paying jobs--that we could see over and over again. And we just said, "Well, we've got to start with women themselves. I mean, we need to do that and then, as soon as we've proven to the legislature that we're worthy of listening to on some of these other issues-- that we're not strident and so forth--then maybe we can do some- thing about community property and domicile and some of these other things. But they certainly won't listen now."

So it was a question of being relevant and smart for your time. And that, I felt, was enormously important.

Sharp: In using the child care focus in these particular recommendations, would the ch.ild care committee have been responsible for doing much of the writing?

Heine: No, I did all of the writing. I hi-red a writer to do the first draft and then I re-wrote it. So, I personally wrote the language of all of the recommendations.

The committees--the child care committee--voted on what the recommen- dations would be, based on the work that we had done together (I haven't yet even said what that was). But just in terms of whose recommendations are they, the committee members all sat through all of the work. (We had the first public hearings in the nation, which was a very valuable thing to do.) The committee met three times at the end of its work to agree on what things to recommend in this field: What did we want to say and how to say it? I wrote those words.

We felt it was very important to involve the legislature in this. So very early on, I was able to convince the consultant Heine: of the Assembly Health and Welfare Committee that child care really was animportant issues. And so, for the first time I know of in the nation a committee of the legislature jointly held public hearings with any kind of a commission, much less a women's comrnis- siion. We held joint public hearings on the state of child care, and invited everybody who had anything to do with it to testify so that we could get a record of what existed and that could then serve as the basis for anybody anywhere who wanted to work on improving the situation. It was very fundamental.

Now, it looks like from the '69 report that most of the focus was on child care. Actually, it was not.

Two other committees (education and employment) worked just as diligently, and did some really fine surveying of women themselves and employers about their attitudes. about hiring women. Again, these were very fundamental: that's just , "Where is everybody's heart and mind?" We discovered very fundamental things about young men's attitudes about themselves--that we were just going to perpetuate the same--

Sharp: Their expectations--

Heine: Yes, just the same old patterns, unless somebody educated them differently.

Homemakers certainly didn't have any idea that, with the divorce rate, they were likely at the age of forty to be out on their ears and having to return to the work force. Certainly, employers hadn't taken in that there was an increasing number of women joining the work force and determined how to utilize their talents.

So, we just saw some very, very fundamental things needed to happen in education, in educating throughout the schools and every other means that we could come up with that would work. And while we knew that legislationwas important, we knew that in these areas, there was the federal legislation, but nobody was enforcing it; it was still legal in California, really, to discriminate in employment on the basis of sex. So, we were really in almost the dark ages, you see, at that time.

The education committee had the benefit of some fine administrators at various universities throughout the state to help with the surveys. We were able to take the teen-age survey and then go to the legislators and say, "Look at these attitudes. These girls are going to end up on welfare if--." It was on that basis that we were able to talk to the Reagan administration, to the governor's people, to say, "I know you're concernedab~utthis,but if you're not fundamental about it, it will just repeat itself. You need to deal with these things .I1 Changing Legislators' Perception of the Commission to Gain Permanent Status in 1971; California Legislative Roundtable

Sharp: Let me push you on just a little. The issue of permanent status for the commission was central in the early period in 1971 which was about four years into the Reagan administration.

Heine: Right.

Sharp: I'd like to know something about your role in helping the commission to achieve permanent status. Then we can talk ahout what changed about the commission afterwards .

Heine: Yes. Right. Well, I left shortly after that. Was that--no, I think that was in '73 that it was made permanent?

Sharp: I have ' 71.

Heine: Yes, that's right,because I remember writing legislation to change the terms of office for the commissioners then, following that. That's right.

I think the times were very tense. That was '71, yes.

Sharp: '71 is when it happened, '70 is when it began.

Heine: Yes, right. And let's see. When was the national ERA [Equal Rights Amendment] going through--that was '72, wasn't it? That was the year af ter that.

Sharp: It was the end of '71. It passed the House October 12, 1971, and came to the states for their ratification in March of '72, and . actually came into the California legislature in April.

Heine: Yes, that's right. Permanence was hard to get, but let me back up and talk about getting new life for the dommission in 1969, since the theme of educating legislators over time and building profes- sional credibility was essential to all our successes, not the least of which was gaining permanence. In 1969 both houses of the legis- lature had Republican majorities. I had been able to win over the then-speaker of the assembly, Bob Monagan. (He had been a foe of the commission, previous to that time.) Just through the fact that we used pilot projects and surveys and research which the predecessor commission didn't have a chance to do. I mean, they barely had a chance to get organized, so I'm not being at all critical of them. You can't do anything worthwhile in a year and a half, really. Heine : But I was able to let him know that we were trying to deal with things from a fundamental point of view and that we werenotcoming from a civil rights poznt of view--while we thought civil rights was important, that was not our prime focus. We felt that we were really makinga contribution to the legislature itself in terms of documents that it could use for many years--facts and so forth. And actually enabling,women to help themselves. So he, then, just made a radical shift and favored us and helped us then to win passage in '69.

When '71 came around, it was much harder because there was again the feeling of, "Well, my God, haven't you finished your work yet?" I mean, this was a two-year commission which certainly would have been able to report about inequities in the law, and, "What was the matter with them that they hadn't," et cetera.

We had the very diffic~lttask~~then,of showing them that, really, the commission--well, I think in '69 we amended the legislation to say that we were not only to be advisory about rights, but that we were to have an information service and to help the local coalitions actually carry out some of these things.

But it took a lot of time to get around to legislators and convince them that this needed doing, and that there needed to be something like an agency, almost an administrative agency--us--that would help these local groups to do these things-. In other words, to sort of change the character of how they were thinking about us: as sort of an ongoing effort that wasn't just to advise what was wrong, but to be giving aid to communities trying to solve their own problems-- much as the state Department of Education gives advice to local schools on how to do this, that, and the other, and so forth.

So that was sort of a massive effort, then in 1969. I used the commissioners widely; I had them come to Sacramento a lot on one- and two-day visits to call on those legislators that they knew. We also counte-d heavily on the California Legislative Roundtable, which I helped to found. That was a very important thing. I worked a great deal with that. It was still touch-and-go given the fact that the RoundtahLe was in its fairly early Stages then. But by '71, they were able to produce several thousand letters on the governor's desk w5thin a week's time. That was really a miraculous undertaking.

Sharp: This was to support permanent status?

Heine: Right, or anything. So, that was really sort of a miracle to get, because those were the classical women's groups.

Sharp: Could you explain to me, sort of in a nutshell, what the Legislative Roundtable was? Heine: Itwascomposed of the state presidents of the long-established women's groups of California. Not the ones that later became associated with the women's movement, because, first of all, they weren't there yet, and much more importantly, the legislators would listen to those other women because they were married to them or were their brothers and sons and so forth. So, it was the AAUW [the American Association of University Women]; the BPW [the National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs]; the [American Ferderation of] Soroptomists, initially; the PTA [Parent-Teacher Association] ; Zonta, an association of business and professional women; and several groups that cared about child care and early childhood education were involved. But I felt it was very important to use those those.

I figured out in the first week I was there, that to do anything, there would have to be grass-roots support. So I called together the state presidents of those organizations and said that we would like to keep them informed of what the commission was doing and wanted input from their members.

It started that way and then it grew toward calling them together to say, did they want to have a commission that continued to exist? If so, they would need to convince their organizations to support it, and in big numbers that would produce letters on the desks of legis- lators and on the governor's desk. They said they did, and it took a while for them to learn to do that down through all those grass roots, but they succeeded very well indeed.

The Legislative Roundtable met quarterly to discuss legislative matters of common interest to themselves, and they had never done that before. Some of those organizations didn't even have legislative platforms, and it was a question of my convincing them that, unless they wanted men to continue .to run the legislature, they should have a voice. That was one way they could do it.

They met quarterly, each group bringing to the meeting issues--what sort of issues were of interest to them--many of them having nothing to do with things the commission was looking into. But it was a way for women's groups--the powerful ones--to join together and join forces andeducate each other. Most importantly from our point of view were those times when their interests coincided with a recom- mendation of the commission, and we were able to have the prompt, strong, and organized support of their thousands of members.

So they had that success in '69, of helping the commission to go forward, and then in '71 they played a very crucial role. An inter- esting sidelight when th.e vote came in '71 for permanence. We were very careful not to let anything come to a vote unless we knew our votes were there at the time. We would tell the author, you know, "Don't bring this up. We need to get so-and-so and so-and-so." Heine: I think at that point it was an amended version somebody had. We'd been told that no way could the commission be permanent. So we were only going for another two years at that point. (And this is going to be very surprising, but I've found life to be a very surprising thing .)

On the afternoon when the commissioncdntinuance bill was to come out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I had the votes; I had promises from each of my yes votes that they would attend the committee meeting that afternoon, and then two of them didn' t show up. I didn't worry about that at first because they often came in late.

But as the time wore on, they didn't come and they didn't come, and somebody who had been a friend that I hadn't even bothered to call on because he'd been a friend fo'r so long, unexpectedly said, "Well, I think these people have had their time. I don't think we need to continue the commission at all," and so, wow, we then had a cliff- hanger .

And someone I didn't know had been friendly said, "Well, I think we should extend them to four years ,I' which surprised the heck out of me.

Then George Deukme j ian, who had always voted against the commission in a very friendly fashion--he always agreed that he would just be absent--spoke up and said, "This group of people has shown that they are responsible, professional, and they have made major contributions to the effective way that we have been able to deal with matters of this sort. I don't think we should mess around with this anymore. This group has proved itself. I vote to amend this bill to make them permanent. "

I almost fainted. People were so startled that they went ahead and voted on that.

How it got in that form was George Deukmejian, who apparently had a feeling that if you stayed around long enough and proved your worth-- and proved you were responsible and proved you were working--that was good enough. That in itself was an important thing to him. And he was not being superficial--he had read the work and saw that it was solid. So that really saved the day for us.

It's always been something that I have treasured in my life. He' certainly didn' t do that because we were acquainted, because he's not that kind of a person. He would never vote against his conscience. It was an astonishing--it was very much a learning experience over time for me, that you can continually be surprised and that you can educate people. Heine: I think I played quite a prominent role in getting permanence for the commission in the sense that people did see that it was something substantive--getting people to not think of it as a special interest group. Because th.ere was a tendency, if you're a special interest group, to be treated in a certain way that doesn't include you as part of the mainstream.

I saw we needed to get together and to have that happen--just deeply fundamental things--and then really saw that it would take a while before we could get to women's real civil rights. And it did. But, you know, I knew we would get bhere. But that we wouldn't unless we had life to do it with.

On to the ERA and Women's Civil Rights in 1972: The Necessity of Timing It Right

Sharp: You know, after permanent status was achieved, you're right into the frying pan, as it were, with the ERA.

Heine: That's right.

Sharp: So, whether or not controversy was something that the commission tried to collectively avoid, that wasn't possible; and the later it got, the more controversy came.

Heine: That's right. At least it had permanence with which, then, to engage itself in that controversy. Had it done so earlier, it would have died, I can just tell you. You know, it came within an ace of being dead in '69. It was only that it was seen sort of as relatively harmless and of not very much importance that it was able to grow to a point where it could engage in controversy. And that was what would be necessary before it could really tackle things like abortion and rape and ERA. It would just kill itself if it took those things on too early. ,

Furthermore, women weren't for those things. George Moscone was planning to run for governor in 1972, and I was called in by his top political aide to advise what big issue could he have that was a women's issue that would get him the women's vote. Now, the question was put more delicately than that, but I mean, that was it.

The aide said, "George has the idea that he would like to sponsor a state ERA, and he would like to call together the women's groups of the state to announce that he wants to do this. What do you think of this?" Heine: And I said, "Please donl.t let him do that, because Phyllis Schlaffly is just codng along, and they've got lots of money, and you will have the biggest mess on your hands you ever saw. The proponents of ERA are not organized at this point and have no money." It was the very early days in the fight and I said, "If you mount a state ERA, it will be defeated.''

And the aide said, "Well, but, I mean, women will vote for it."

I said, "No, they won't. They won't, because the opponents will lead them to believe that this is bad for women.''

So he said to me, "Well," he said, "how do you know that you're right? Why should you be telling women what's right for them if they have a different opinion?"

And I said, "Well, what does George do when he thinks he's right and his constituents are wrong?"

Well, that had never occurred to him.

But they backed down. They said, "All right, we respect your opinion and we won' t do that then ."

And thank God, because that would have been awful. It would have been defeated--it was in New York, as you know, two years later--or the next year. It was mounted in New York and it was sadly defeated.

It was time to leave the commission, then, because I'm frankly not a person who is good in dealing with head-on controversies. What I'm good at is long-range strategizing, and I would have known, .far instance, that you should very carefully pick one controversial thing that you can win and not ruin yourself on until people can accept that it is okay for you to deal in controversy. Where activist women really were then, about the time I left, was, "Well, why can't we just be up front about the fact that we want abortion, and abortion laws repealed, and we want community property, and we want the ERA, and we want all the rape laws put down--we want this all at once. Why can't we have it?"

I know that it doesn't happen that way. You know, it's an evolving thing, and if you have a government agency--and Iknewthat there was a very fine question there about having a government agency which would appear to lobby for only one half of the population; and that if that question got called, we would be in very big trouble. And I was right.

Sharp: That's what happened. tieine: That's what happened later on. They're presently muzzled. Heine: One of the groups which has vigorously opposed the ERA brought and won a court case in the mid '70's which was upheld on appeal in 1981. The judgment prohibits in important ways the commission's communi- cation with either the public or the legislature. I understand that the strategy to overcome this injunction which has been agreed on by the current commission (1984) and its lawyers (the California Attorney General's Office) is passage of new legislation rather than taking t?5e matter to the California Supreme Court. But this court fight over many years has eaten up important time and energy that could have been spent productively. I think the earlier point about careful planning is upheld.

It seemed to me that the ques.tion of the ERA as a controversy was the appropriate one to fight on, and we did. We mounted everything we had on that because it seemed to us that if we got passage of the ERA then we'd have the ball game, because it would mean that all. California's laws would have to be amended to be in accordance with the ERA principle, and we'd get the whole ball of wax at once.

Sharp: And it wouldn't he on your shoulders, either.

Heine: That's right. We would look like, th.en, the helpful ones by providing technical assistance to the legislature and this, again, was a right role for us as a government office. Our intention was to do compre- hensive research which would report all the changes in California statutes which would be necessary to meet the ERA'S standard. It didn't occur to us that ERA would fail in its national ratification effort. /I /I Heine: Also at about this time, we had statewide public hearings so that we could go back to the legislature and say, "Now, we've been all over the state and these are what women tell us. This is not us telling you, but this is what women tell us their needs and concerns are.''

During that time of the beginning of our new status as a permanent commission, we felt again a need to build another sort of new, higher- level platform--but again, a broad-based platform to go back to the governor and legislature with and say, "Okay now, here's where people are now and they are concerned about rape and battered women and these other things. And heavens, we had no idea these were going on, but look this is what women themselves say." So, we felt that things had evolved and we had enough credibility by then to be taken seriously as professional colleagues; we could begin to take on some of those things at that point in time. Working with Local Women's Commissions, Other Organizations in the Community, and the Legislature; Additional Notes on Child Care and Education Issues

Sharp: There was, I believe at this point, the establishment of local women's commissions.

Heine: Right.

Sharp: So, in this '71 to '72 period, these smaller local commissions are established. At that time, there were ERA support groups in California--more known ones like Common Cause, the ACLU [American Civil Liberties Union] and NOW [National Organization for Women], of course.

Heine : Right.

Sharp: Even the NAACP [National Association for the Advancement of Colored People] and some of the other groups. Exactly how did these local women's commissions and all of these other more well-known groups work together?

Heine: Well, I don't think they did. Or if they did, I have no knowledge of it. We were very instrumental in the initiation, and care and feeding of local commissions on the status of women, whether they were official bodies or just unofficial bodies. It was one of the commission's 1969 recommendations. We saw that a lot of the things that needed to be done could only be done at the local level; and that if there were no ongoing bodies there, we could pass legis- lation until the cows came home and nothing would change.

We tended to work with them not on legislative lines but on these much more life-support-system lines: child care issues, good coun- seling in the schools, votes in boards of education with women on them. Just a whole range of things that would raise the conscious- ness of women in their day-to-day lives.

On the issues of ERA passage in the California legislature, we tended to work through the California Legislative Roundtable because it was set up to deal with legislation and I doubt that there really was much interaction among these groups and the local commissions at that time. What happened after I was gone, I really don't know.

Sharp: You left in--.

Heine: '73. Yes, at the end of the summer of '73.

Sharp: We've talked a lot about the legislature and you mentioned yourself relationships with the legislature and keeping it open-- Heine: Absolutely.

Sharp: --and their not seeing you as a threat, not seeing the commission as a strident group--an unreasonable group. I'd like to know more about how you might have dealt with them on some more specific issues besides ERA so that I have a more specific sense of what the ongoing relationship was between the commission and the legislature. So maybe we could consider a couple of other specific issues that you remember working with t5e)legislature on.

Heine: Right. Well, I think the one on which we spent a lot of time was the child care issues. For various reasons, child care impacted the jurisdiction of three committees of the legislature: the Health and Welfare Committee of the assembly because of the link between welfare and child care if welfare mothers were to be enabled to work, and the education committees of both houses because the only existing public child care program was funded partially by the state and was operated by local school districts.

We felt it would make a substantial and long-lasting contribution if legislators on these committees came to see that child care issues were squarely the business of the Legislature and of their committees, and we were successful in getting their agreement to hold joint public hearings in San Francisco with us. We felt it was very important for these legislators to sit on the dais with us and hear this testimony.

So they did, and it became part of their own reports. Their own consultants then, when bills on child care came up, would be able to tell new committee members what's involved, whatwere the issues, what were the pros, what were the cons, what were the numbers, and so on. Well, you know, making it "their own" seemed to me to be a fundamentally sound thing to do. So, we accomplished that in the child care field and the first really landmark legislation was passed as a result of it. They just quoted us chapter and verse. And these were Republicans that carried these bills, which was an amazing thing. But it was a successful thing.

Other work on child care involved the education committees where bills having to do with the technical side of credentialing teachers for work in child care centers and other things of that sort were involved. Plus, again, I would bring commissioners to Sacramento often to call on key members of Assembly arid Senate Education Committees about needs to continue to support certain legislation that we had suggested in those fields.

But more importantly, I guess an awful lot of our relationships with

thelegislasurehad to do with continuance. , But we didn't really talk about continuance for the sake of continuance. Heine: We would say to the members of the Education Committee: "Now look at our recommendation here that we've just made in the field of education. This is not going to cost the state a penny. But the fact that we have found all of these nitty-gritty things which, when taken back to local boards of education can be quoted as being government recommended and in a government document, means that those local groups, then, can use local tax funds to achieve these special courses for these girls on welfare and so on and so on--see?"

So, we took our own recommendations and at the time, it just was circumstantial that what we were selling was also the time when our life was at stake. I mean, we had just made a set of recommendations and we were saying, ere they are. we 're trying to sell them," but also, "Don't you see--if we aren't around to help this continue, to make sure this gets carried out, it won't get carried out."

Sharp: That's really what you were telling me before about the commission evolving into somewhat of a watchdog in a restrained sort of way.

Heine: Well, less a watchdog than a sort of administrative helper, in other

words. I

We had written into our legislation that there should be an infor- mation and consultative service and we would be the consultative service. So that if School Board X would put into their schools our counseling and guidance package for teenage girls which we had produced-we had to be there in order to produce it, and we had to be there in order to give it, and we had to have funds in order to see that they got it and they then would reproduce it with their funds for their district.

We were becoming sort of a part of what some other state departments did, but focused on women. In other words, there was an employment department in the state and therewas an education department in the state, et cetera. But they didn't attend to the needs of women and girls. And if we did, then we could, well, be like the state Depart- ment of ducati ion's consultants that would go into a school district to help them with, say, the special in-service training needed to meet the special needs of women and girls.

What we were trying to sellto the legislators was that we should not only advise them, the legislature, but that we should exist to give direct consultative service to problem solvers in communities and local government bodies of one kind or another. Changes in Protective Labor Laws: The Roles of Charles Warren and Organized Labor

Sharp: I thought we might talk a little bit about Charles Warren.

Heine: A wonderful man.

Sharp: And some of his bills.

Heine: Yes. Now that was probably the most exciting battle, the battle to outlaw sex discrimination in employment. He was just a very coura- geous man, because he was not popular with his colleagues fordoing that.

Sharp: I'm sure not.

Heine: He was very highly thought of and he was very popular with them in general, but they did not appreciate his doing that. It took a lot of guts on his part to do that. And he did that because he thought it was right and believed in it. He's one of my heroes, Charles Warren.

Sharp: He's quite exceptional and he has been one of our interviewees.*

Heine: I noticed that. I was very pleas.ed to see that.

Sharp: We talked with him mostly about some of the environmental legislation. He is sort of our tag into the women's commission, because he actually brought it to my attention--

Heine : Aha--good .

Sharp: --and got me.more interested in it and I sort of took it fron: there. One particular Warren bill in 1972 is AB 256, which, if I understand it correctly, applied a $1.65 an hour minimum wage to men.

Heine: Ah, yes.

*See his interview, "From the California Assembly to the Council on Environmental Quality, 1962-1979: The Evolution of an Environmen- talist," in process, in this same Reagan series. * Sharp: Dropping gender distinctions with the minumum wage.

Heine : With the minimum wage, right.

Sharp: That represents one of the equal pay issues. Maybe we can just set out why that was a controversial bill. You know, what was the matter with it and who was against it? So, you could tell me what was going on in the legislature and why people were lining up the way they were.

Heine: The minimum wage has always been one of the most controversial things in the world. We didn't touch it with a ten-foot pole. It's usually thought of as being a matter that most negatively affects teenagers. We didn't see it affecting women more than men, although it may well have.

Sharp: Since Mr. Warren was on the commission I thought perhaps this might have been a recommendation of the commission that he was carrying into the legislature.

Heine: No, no. What year was that? '73?

Sharp: April '72, is what I get.

Heine: Seventy-two? No, it would not have been at that point in time. They might have taken up..the plinimum wage later on, but--and the thrust of the bill was to do what?

Sharp: Apply the $1.65 an hour minimum wage, to men.

Heine: Gosh, I don't even remember that it didn't apply to men. Wow. That's really a lapse on my part. I should have remembered some- thing like that, sorry.

Well, now the other things in labor legislation where men and women issues get involved. You may have noticed we did deal with the weight lifting law, the hours law, the overtime pay laws, all those. That was enormously loaded for us because the AFL-CIO [American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations] and almost all labor unions werestrongproponents of protective labor laws for women.

*For more information on this bill and other labor bills in this session, and labor's relationship to the ERA, see, "Labor Opposition Stalls Equal Rights Amendment in the Senate," by Geraldine L. Sherwood, in California Journal, April 1972, p. 112. Heine: There was controversy, there was disagreement over whether they were really trying to protect women or oppress women. It was just a very, very, very difficult issue, with enormous guns on both sides, and a member of the commission was Virginia Allee, chief of the Industrial Welfare Commission, which is charged with carrying out those things. Where we were able to make progress, we did. We did recommend, you may recall, that the weight-lifting law be extended to men. But that took until the second session before we could even make that kind of a recommendation for change.

The commission just frankly didn't have enough political clout in those days to take on the entire Republican establishment, which believes there should be no regulations on business at all, on the one hand, and the entire labor movement on the other hand--saying that there should be even stricter and more extensive regulation of business. .It was a massively difficult thing to deal with and as it happened, praponents of extension to men of good regulations were able to deal with that without us at all, and really spared us getting into that. I was very, very grateful for that.

Organized labor was totally against ERA right up until, gosh, I don't know how long, for that very reason. They were worried what would happen with the protective labor laws until they were able to get them extended to men.

Sharp: Well, I introduced it because I thought we might be able to get at the line that the commission had to go down to ensure its own health.

Heine: Well, we were not given any instructions about it. I mean, no one representing the governor's office told us what we could look into and what we couldn't look into. Virginia Allee, the "chieftt of the Industrial Welfare Commission, in those days--who was a Reagan appointee, was a very objective person who, I believe, felt that a massive issue like protective labor laws would take immense political clout to do anything about. That it was an enormously difficult subject, which it is: profoundly affecting the economy of the state and the very bread in the mouths of thousands and tens of thousands of people.

In all candor, I think she believed that it was not a matter that should be played around with by what she considered to be a very minor commission of mostly volunteers. I didn't agree with her position, but I could understand it and we had no trouble agreeing to disagree. You wi'll recall that the full-time staff of the commission In those early days was me and one secretary, and I think, half-way through, I was able to appoint consultants and pay them on a consulting basis, and two or three of them. on a project basis. Heine: The predecessor commission was headed by Ruth Miller who was head of the AFL-CIO Political Committee and they, of course, recommended retention of the labor laws. That was just, you know, the straight labor party line.

Looking back on this now, I don't think it was unwise of us to avoid that as an issue. I don't think we could have done a bit of good. Istudiedit in very considerable depth because I knew it was going to come up at some point and wemight have to face it head-on, and I wanted to feel like I really understood what was coming down here.

But happily, the tenor of the times changed so that we didn't have to deal with it. Ithappened without us. We didn't have to make enemies of the AFL-CIO.

Sharp: There's no going back on that one.

Heine: Yes, pretty tough cookies. Although I had very cordial relations with them.

Women and "Women's Issues"; the Divorce Reform Bill, 1969

Sharp: I see that you made some notes and I want to be sure that we get to things that I may not have brought up that you see as important to cover.

Heine: These are just reminders for me in very brief form of the major things that we were working on in each of the committees of the commission when I was there. I just made them to refresh my own memory--they are actually things that are contained in the written reports, so this was jus.t to remind myself when it was that we did the teenager survey, and when we did the pilot project, and who the groups were that we worked with then.

I'll say this, there's very little that I would do differently. I still give talks about this to women's groups from time to time and I always start off by reminding people how very different everybody's consciousness was fn 1967. It quite literally was an entirely different world. Buying time to do what needed to be done was an enormously important thing. Building credibility, not just head-on kinds of things that would get you defeated immediately. This seemed to me to be of crucial importance.

I spent a great deal of my time-I probably spent two days a week for seven years traveling around the state talking to local chapters of the American Association of University Women, the Business and Heine: and Professional Women's Clubs, Soroptomists.,and the General Federation of Women's Clubs, the Junior League, the Assistance League, all of those. I knew that we needed that constituency. I mean, women did--the state did. I could see that this was going to go forward and that it was needed. The state needed its women. It really did. And the planet needed its women. I really got to be quite a visionary about it after a time.

The story that always got the homemakers, the true story--because I never, to come back to the beginning, I never told them they were oppressed--at all. My message always was: "This is the reason you need to support a group that will let you know."

I told homemakers the story about the no-fault divorce reform bill: "The commission has a position on the divorce reform bill, the bill, among other things would do away with alimony based on sex, and do away wiith child support based on sex, and institute no-fault grounds for divorce. What this would mean is that any husband can divorce any wife with no grounds whatever and, in many cases, not have to pay alimony; and, in many other cases, get custody of that child. And I want to tell you who are proposing these laws, and who are voting on them, and who are testifying on them."

When I went to the committee room to give the commission's testimony on this bill, I ran into several old friends of mine from my law school days who were out-of-city witnesses for the bill. I went into the room and they were happy to see me and said, "Oh, Carolyn, how nice to see you. We haven't seen you in a while but heard you were with the Women's Commission. So, you've come to see the show." I said, "No, I've come to testify."

Sharp: To -be the show.

Heine: "I've come to testify."

Three different men, all lawyers, said to me, "Well, Carolyn, why would the women's commission have a pokition on this bill? This is not a woman's issue. This is a legal issue."

And, I tell you, that exchange--the idea that legislators didn't see divorce reform as a women's issue--changed the consciousness of more middle-class ladies who would no more have gotten involved with any political thing than fly to the moon. But it suddenly came home to them that where they lived was being decided by people who considered them beneath consideration, even. I mean, they didn't even count.

I mean, we don't listen to women about anything. And in fact, if you're going to do things about women, you don't even have to ask Heine: them about it. They don't even count as people, that you should consider what they think about this.

It takes a little while for that to really sink in, but when it does--

Sharp: It's permanent.

Heine: It's a very moving thing.

Then I would go on and say, "You know, there are committees in Congress right now deciding what we're going to do about genetics, the possibility of deciding, you know, the sex of children and their characteristics and all that. None of those committees has even one woman sitting on them. Nor do they think it is important to do so."

So, you see, given the tenor of those times, I am very proud of what our commissioners did. I mean, they made it possible for the rest to happen. And incidentally, outlawed sex discrimination in employ- ment in the state and did the landmark legislation for child care which enabled a lot of women to do a lot of things, get a lot of education.

But it was very fundamental--laying the building blocks.

Sharp: Well, it sounds like not only were the issues that you dealt with so fundamental, but just the way that you garnered the support and the way that you built the commission was also fundamental, so step- by-step in such a measured way.

Heine: Ifeltthat--and it's just sort of my way of doing things--that if you don't build a base from which something can grow, then it can't grow.

I guess the fact that we had both Democrats and Republicans on the commission, and we did have legislators--I mean, that was part of it.

You had to have three members of the assembly and three of the senate. They became strongsupporters after a while, too. Theoriginalcommis- sion had put on it several male legislators who had voted against it-- as a joke. You know, that old thing. I mean, that's how bad things were then, that they would do that. And also, could get away with it.

It didn't really matter. Some of the women who wereon that commission were what you would call socialites. But they really did their home- work. They really learned. They had their consciousnesses raised. It was very reminiscent of the original suffrage movement: it was finally when you got Alva Belmont out there marching in the street-- she came down out of her Fifth Avenue mansion--that you knew that you had gotten to the point where you could breakthrough. Heine: This is not to say that what our predecessor commission had done prior to us was not also important. Of course, it was. But the issue was right. hat's how I knew it was an issue whose time had come, because all you had to do was really give the data, and you could win almost anybody over. Now, you had to get their attention, they had to trust you, you had to have enough time; but once you did that, then things became self-evident.

So, I knew that women themselves throughout the state had to hear that and sense that in order for things to be fundamentally changed. Or else we just would have a repeat again of--after women won the vote, then everybody would go home again. (I didn't think that would happen, given birth control, population problems, and how many more women were educated, but I felt very deeply the weight of respon- sibility to do everything that I could.) But that didn't happen.

Sharp: It all fits in so well with some of the other interviewslongsince completed with Alice Paul, Sarah Bard Field, and quite a few others as part of a California Women Political Leaders Project that was done in our office several years ago. In all of it, talking with women about their roles in politics--some very conservative, some obviously not so conservative. But they're telling us about their activities, why they got into politics and the kinds of issues that they were interested in working on. Certainly a lot of party issues, but also some substantive issues--the idea of suffrage, of course, and then moving on from there.

I had a couple other isolated questions. There were, of course, women in the assembly--Yvonne Brathwaite, March Fong, and some others, and I'm wondering if these women formed a special network that the commission might have worked with, if they were somehow separate? # # Heine: They were Democrats. The Republican appointees, obviously, while they had no problem talking with the women legislators when they saw them, it just was not wise to seek them out. It was not a way that we worked, in other words. We called on members of key commit- tees when our legislation was coming up--we certainly called on them.

But I had known Yvonne personally. She had been a student at the law school when I was there, and March Fong was my landlady and lived under me [laughter] and so we had a very good personal relationship-- they knew where I was coming from. They knew that I was an indepen- dent and really a nonpartisan person working for the issues.

I think at first March was a little suspicious of me, but after we got to know each other--it was one of those things where we just agreed that where we could make common cause, we would do so, but that publicly we probably wouldn't be very much in each other's laps. Just because this was the so-called Reagan commission. Heine: We tried to be wise about that. There really wasn't much of a net- work. They had almost no clout. They were both new members of the legislature themselves. They were women, and women had no clout. There were no women in the senate, as you know. They were helpful every chance they got, but for those reasons we didn't try to use them in a public way.

The Commissionls~.Relationshipwith the Governor's Office; the Task of Raising the Conscfousnes.s of California's Girls and Women

Sharp: We talked about how thech-ild care recommendations were generated and awarded and came into printed form. Are there other recommen- dations that may have followedanother pattern in the way they ended up?

Heine: To some degree, although in all cases I wrote every word of the recommendations and checked them out with legislative counsel and others to make sure that they were worded technically in such a way as to be appropriate.

The route in each case--we formed committees. So the commissions final reports represented the recommendations of those committees, the substance of them.

There were a few issues which were collateral to things that we had worked on that were really being plugged by other organizations. For instance, one group, I forget which, was trying to get a special credential created for early childhood education to enable more people to be trained. Well, we would never, in the course of what we were doing, have discovered that that was a problem.

But any time we worked with any group, we said to them, "NOW what are you pushing that we can agree to and put down in our recommen- dations. So that having another government document saying the same thing that you're saying will help you to achieve goals of yours that we agree on."

There are a bunch of very technical things in here--let's see if I can find an example. I saw one down here. Well, the divorce reform, for instance, was one of those. The Women Lawyers of California recommended that to us, and we said fine. The tax relief for heads of household recommendation was another thing that the Women Lawyers of California had. We just asked them.

In each case, I said to them, "Send me up your exact wording." And I think, for all practical purposes, I just changed, you know, the first few words of the thing, and then just put their languagein. Heine: Because many groups told us that the commission's recommendation would have great power. If for instance you're someone working with a board of education, to be able to go before a board of education and say, "~ook--here' is a government document from Sacramento that says X needs to be done. I mean, the government itself favors this."

So it's like we now say, "Well, the Labor Department says--" so it must be true, righ.t?

We did, I would say,maybeup to 15 percent of these recommendations on that sort of thing. It was not really the result of things we investigated firsthand, but where we were working with a group on our project. They worked with us, and then we said, "Are there some other ways that we can help with what you're doing that bears on this, that will help to get this to happen." We did do some of that.

But in every case, no, the committees themselves agreed on the sub- stance of these recommendations. Then the commission as a whole had to have a final meeting each time, and each commissioner voted on the work of the other committees so that all the recommendations represented the commission as a whole. We never had a split vote. I mean,,everybody agreed on everything.

Sharp: How did that come about?

Heine: Well, as we said earlier this afternoon, the commission didn't take on the really controversial things during my time. I

The only things that were really controversia1wer;ethe labor laws. We had mostly Republican women on the commission and they didn't know quite what to do with that issue, so we just took some kind of middle ground that said, "This is important and let's keep looking at it."

Sharp: Did you have a way of keeping the governor's office informed of your progress other than fonnal.reports such as this?

Heine: They never did set up a formalizedrep,ort~ngprocess,an ongoing reporting process for us to report to them. I therefore just sent quarterly progress reportswhichweretwo- or three-page memos saying, "This is what we are currently looking at and doing."

They wen very busy and we were very low on the priority list of things that I think the Reagan administration wanted to achieve. There wasn't anything that they, you know, specifically wanted us to do, and so I just took advantage of that to give us the freedom that we needed.

In other words, I was not asked to report in a certain way, and so I reported in a way that I thought would be best calculated to keep Heine: things on an even keel and to give us time to build support for the major legislation that I thought the governor's office might question --so that at the time he had to deal with it, he would be able to support it. And that came about.

Sharp: You know, in the governor's office, of couse, there were certain specialized people. Me1 Bradley was someone who was involved very much with minority affairs. And Alex Sherriffs was involved quite a bit with educational concerns, especially higher education, really. There wasn't a women's person from the list of the governor's office staff?

Heine: No, there wasn't.

Nancy Reynolds and I went on a lot of speaking engagements together. She's a very fine person. (Happy to report, her sister got arrested in the Berkeley riots because she just happened to be coming out of a store at the wrong time.) I found her a very simpatico person who was next to--she was very close to both Ronald and Nancy Reagan. We got along very well together.

I did not report to Nancy [Reynolds]. She was in the press section. The person I reported to was always called the cabinet secretary. And that was first Ken [Kenneth 3.1 Hall and later, sorry to tell you this, but I cannot remember.

Sharp: Win IWinfred] Adams.

Heine: Oh, Win. Yes, I remember Win.

But it was very perfunctory. At one point, and this is after we were made permanent, I was told that there was a plan to put the commission under one of the cabinet agencies and to "give us proper support" as long as we were going to be permanent. And that we would talk about that as soon as the then-cabinet secretary got back from his vacation and I got back from my vacation. This was the end of the session. Happily for us, he never came back from his vacation. Whoever that was, he switched jobs. When I came back from mine, you may rest assured that I did not bring it up with his successor.

Sharp: What would have been the impact of that had it gone through?

Heine: Well, it would have msant that we would have had to go through enor- mous channels to do anything, and I think it really would have been the death knell. I mean, the commission just really would have been reduced to nothing.

One of the reasons, as a matter of fact, for the first year, after it was made permanent, the governor did not reappoint--the appoint- ments had lapsed and he did not make reappointments of enough people Heine: to get a quorum for the better part of a year. And I did not press him to do so. That was the reason: I knew that it would be very, verydetrimentaltobea part of one of the state agencies--it's just a way of squelching something. I came under some criticism for that-- that I wasn't pressing the governor, you know. But I just let it be. You had to be a big girl. I learned to be a big girl there.

Sharp: Well, the ways of the commission's working are very sophisticated and from everything you've told me, were learned just by observing what was the practical thing to do. How to survive. And that's really what the commission did for a long time.

Heine: Yep.

Sharp: I think that's really all my questions. Whatnags at me is one of the articles I sent you, the '74 California Journal article which was dealing with the period after you had left. That was about modernizing the rape legislation.*

Heine: Yes. We really didn't deal with that during my time except for hearing about it for the first time at the public hearings that we held in the spring of 1973. That began to become an issue that one heard about in any format. I don't really know whether that's because rape was then on the rise, or because women were just begin- ning to speak out--the whole '60s generation of women were coming along and speaking their minds then. But that was really the first time that we became aware that there was a serious and widespread issue that should be dealt with.

I left the commission just as it took up its new work of deciding which things from those public hearings it would take up. I have not really followed it since. I did at first. There were a whole series of bills, and I was very pleased to see that something was finally happening there. But there was so much, I finally stopped following it.

It's enormous.ly surprising to me how much progress has been made there. I imagine there's still a lot more that needs to be done. I can only tell you that I never had any conversation with any man (and most women) in those days who didn't believe the classical

*See "Top Goal of Women's Groups; Protecting Rape Victims ~ights," by Bruce Keppel, California Journal, July 1974. See the following page for a summary, drawn from this article, of the bills and resolutions concerning rape considered in the California assembly in 1974. Shortcomings in California's rape laws and procedures*- The eight billa and five remolutiots more women to k employed in The cautionary ju ry instruction introduced .r a result of the Amem- dl mnka of law enforcement. contain8 a particular reference bly Criminal Jurtice Committee However, certain minimum to "frsmaIen and implier that a rape hearing rummarize what the entry level hyrical require- woman'r testimony ir parlicu- committee concluded to k ahortcom- menta have % ad the effect of larly auapect. The theory be- ing~in preent atate law and pme- diequalifying women applic- hind the cautionary instruction durer. These finding8 are quoted ants. may k valid where the uncor- below, followed by the Iegirlation (AB 3655 prohibit8 wc of "ar- roborated testimony of the vic- propond to correct the deficiency. bitmy phyrical npuiremmb" tim ia king ured to convict the that diaqdihworn.) d;however, ruch an in- .The training and instruction mionia inappropriate when polie 0-n -ie qsnemlly Emergency mdcal facilitier there ia comborating evidence emphuitsr the legal elements rovide inadequate tmatment of the elements of the crime. of the crime of rape. Little, if L rape victim A woman who (AB3659 dim away with the of- my, tnhbg time ia apent dic ha8 been raped ir often beabn finaiw refireme to "fimale" and cuuing the psychologid and and traumatized. The extent of the medical treatment ia fte- limit8 we of the reworded in- emotional &of the rape vic- rtruction to oowr of uncorrobu- tim. Conaequently, peace quently limited to a va@d ex- mkd krtimony.) officera often dirplay a amination for the purpore of aignificant l.ck of mnaitivity in gathering potential evidence. The jury hbuction which ex- their handling of rape victim. (ACR 220 uge8 that mpc vic- plaina the relevancy of the (ACR217 wgu rrmedial tmin- tima be giwn "a thorough a- victim'r "unc- chanrcter*'in ing.) amination fir bthiphyrid and archaic and han little relevancy emotional hums and be in- to ureiety'r preent attitudes Mort lawanforament agencies firmed of community rervicca toward eexual behavior. have inadequately dedand amiklblr to them.) (AB 3660 and AB 3658 elimi- nak the ofi~iukrm and re- in-bative units for Many phyricianr on duty at . strict ure of ruch evidence to wxual offenwa. Special rape emergency medical facilitier investigative units which have nape cuaer in which a judicial ue not experienced in the ex- evaluation following a proce- been established by a fm de- mining pdurea neceranry partmentr provide more dure, rpecified in AB 3661, to gather evidence from ra e fin& relerranct.) thorough and effective inves- victim. Cams ue dropped fdr tigation of rape reports. huffklnt evidence .r a reault California'r preent penalty for (ACR 218 calk fir rLok encour- of inadequate examination8 the conviction of rape (three agemet of rcch lowl uniL.1 which ignored- valuable evi- ycan to life) ir overly broad and Rape victim8 believe that dence. may deter dirtrict attorneye Zbmele officen would be more (AB 3656 requircr that such from filing complaints. facilities have experienced (AB 3662 rcb penalties for rape wnritive to their needr and at . that more policewomen rhould phyaicicmr on call fir aamina- two to knyeam for a first of- & available to to calla tion and Wmmnt of mpc vic- fenre and three to twenty-five rqmnd tima.) for rubsequent offensea.) &om raw victim. yearn (ACR239 an "~rmatiw .Hqital & emergency md- ~Individualrwould be leas vul- auignment program" to do 80.1 d facilitier charge victim of nerable to rape and other phye- rape for corb of the mdcal ex- ical aaaaults if they were able to There ia a wbt.ntid need for amination nemmary to compile defend themselvee. evidence for poedble pro#lcu- (ACR 221 urges local rchool 'IrirdLyr and Rc~omnudationrbr Rwbiy California'r Lawr Relating to Rape. tion. districts to include #elf-defense &umbly Criminal Jurtice Committee, (AB 3657 firbids thu, ding chr~8in high rchool physical- March 1974. it a local law-enfimment cost.) education courses.)

California Journal July 1974, p. 224 Heine: thing that, well, it was almost impossible to rape a woman. That was really the common belief. Is that not astonishing? Now, I knew better than that, but-it's amazing how much conscious.ness-raising has taken place.

Sharp:, And really in a relatively short period of time.

Heine: A relatively short period of time. We did see that the commission's 1969 and 1971 reports went to every school in California, to every women's club in California, to every library in California.

One of the outcomes of the work we did with teenagers was a package of things that high school counselors could use with teenage girls to raise their consciousness--one, a highly successful thing, a game called "When I Grow Up, I Want to be Married." It has been translated into Spanish and is used all over the country.

Sharp: It's a game?

Heine: It's a game, like "Monopoly," only you use pieces of paper. I spent a lot of time on this myself; in fact, it is largely my own contrib- ution. I find that it is still being used in schools all over the place.

It's a thing where girls are given a set of facts about themselves which represent statistics about what happens tollwomen: how many of them marry, how many of them go on to college, how many of them do these various things..

The girls then take those for facts and, given what they would like to do with their whole lives for real, then they pick up a chance card. It says some other things that really happen, like, "Your husband just died. What are you going to do now?" Or, "Your husband has just divorced you and you now have three children and you didn't go to college," and so forth.

That was very widely used throughout the state and the schools, and I still run into people who are using it. So I think we did some things to help raise that consciousness. Since we were the only funded commission in the country at that time, our stuff went to every other commission in the country. I think it really did play an important leadership role--things just mushroomed from there. I think they would have happened anyway, 'cause that's evolution, but I think it would have been much slower.

Sharp: Well, having California to draw on, the other commissions just stepped on thc next platform and--

Heine: Right. And the local commissions were able to take all of our stuff, then;..you see; then other cities got them, and they were going to do these things at the local level. So, I think it had a very big effect. Sharp: I really appreciate your talking with me.

Heine: I know it's a sleeper. People don't know about it, but it doesn't really matter so much as long as it got done--and to have been famous, and have everybody know, would have killed us. Wf

Transcriber: Lindy Berman Final Typist: Stella Dao 3 7

TAPE GUIDE -- Carolyn Cooper Heine

Date of Interview: July 9, 1984 tape 1, side A tape 1, side B tape 2, side A tape 2, side B hwd+, % S'J-

INTRODUCTION

When the Le islature and the Governor acted aff irmatively on Senate Bill 56f in July of 1967, the green light was given for continuation of California 's Advisory Commission on the Status of Women. Since membership of the Commission was almost entirely new, its first task was to read and digest reams of transcripts, proceedings, and other documents amassed by its predecessor Commission, Other early required reading included 1,000 printed pages of reports of work done nationally on the subject, Cornmiss ioners learned of the following startling changes in the lives of women in only the last half century: .. Women live substantially longer, The life expectancy 0.f a woman in 1900 was 48 years ; today it is 75 years and it will go higher, .. About half of today's young women are married by age 20; they will have had their last child by about age 30; and by the time the youngest is in school, the mother will have 40 years of life ahead of her, ., In 1920 the average woman worker in the nation was single and 28 years old; in 1968 the median age was 40 and the average woman worker was married. .. More than half of today's young women will work full time for 25 or more years. .. The percentage increase of California women workers in the last nine years has been nearly 50 percent (48,3). ., Close to 1 in 10 families in California is headed by a woman ,

Looking to the reasons for change, the Commission found them subtle, yet obvious when viewed objectively: The American way of life bears little physical resemblance in 1969 to that of the year 1900 when most Americans lived on farms, few owned their own homes, few went to college, automobiles and wonder drugs were unknown, as were basic labor saving devices and income tax. Commissioners also learned that despite the changes, women themselves and the society around them, are largely unaware of their impact or how to incorporate wise planning to deal with them, In one Commission study, teenagers were asked for their view of their futures, Only 31 percent planned on college, a scant - three percent saw a need for education or training at age 30, and only two percent at age 40. This naivete hits hard against the rock of reality--the need for training, re-training, education, or continuing education as technology erodes today's knowledge, skills and expertise at a rapid rate, especially since nearly all of to- day's school girls will be gainfully employed at sometime in their lifetime, and will live and enjoy good health an average of 30 years after their children are grown. This Report is not a brief for encouraging all women to have careers in paid employment, but rather for each woman to make an enlightened appraisal of how to make best use of a much longer life span and a changed life pattern in a world that bears little resemblance to that of only 50 years ago. This Report does reflect work undertaken in three areas of major concern--child care, education, and employment. Much remains to be done. Early in its work the Commission identified numerous is- sues which need further understanding, clarification and attention-- .. Realistic counseling of irls about the roles they will assume: student, homema g er, mother, worker, citizen. .. Immediate answers for the full time homemaker whose family is grown and who has a third of her life yet ahead of her. .. Availability of educational programs to meet women's needs and life patterns. .. Coordination and dissemination of information on existing facilities and services. .. Strengthening family life. .. Increased need of communities for talented volunteers. .. Lack of understanding and dialogue between men and women about their roles in a changing society. .. Need for more qualified women in public office and other decision making positions. .. Labor laws and the working woman. .. Job aptitude testing, training, hiring, and advancement. .. Special problems of unmarried heads of household. .. The "package" of problems facing mothers.on welfare. .. Discrimination in employment. .. Child care needs and services. -

In its limited time to date, the Commission has dealt with some of these issues. Many of the Commission's recommendations involve actions which could and should be taken by existing entities and organizations throughout the state--schools and colleges, women's groups, business and industry, professional associations, and gov- ernment, all of which will need technical and consultive assistance if solutions are to be implemented and progress achieved. The major problems facing our society today do not permit of the waste of talent and wisdom of any segment of its citizenry, There are millions of California women. How exciting the prospect of the contribution of their full potential! The Commission considers that its work has just begun. 41 ing unused physical facilities which can be adapted for use as child care centers; and, which is also responsible for other creative solutions which do not fall within the authorization or responsibility of exist- ing departments of state government.

RECOMMENDATIONS COORDINATION, AM) PRIVATE SECTOR INVOLVEMENT THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that the ."community Coordinated Child Care" (4 C1s) approach proposed by the federal government be adopt- ed wltnln the state. lmplementatlon or tne 4 r;'s calls ror coor- alnatlng councils at botn tne state and local level. The state level coordinating council should be composed of representatives of state departments responsible tor child care programs and services, relevant state advisory boards and commis- sions, and relevant protessional organizations.

The Commission recommends that local welfare planning councils or equivalent groups establish local coordinating councils, and that care be taken to ensure that parents ot children who will be using the services be included in the membership ok such local - - councils,

CHILD CARE NEEDS OF MIGRANT AGRICULTURAL FAMILIES THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that appropriate legislative action be taken to provide the required matching funds during 1969 to support migrant day care programs, and that the state coordinating council (see above recommendation) examine workable alternatives tor 1970 and thereakter. SHORTAGE OF TRAINED STAFF THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that legislative action be taken to add a specialization in early childhood education to the possi- $$- bilities$$- of specialization within the existing standard teachi'n ed to - the field,- and in turn can assist in the in-service train- ine of child care aides and volunteers. THE COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMENDS that the Coordinating Council for Higher Education give high priority to its study of the prob- lems of transferrability of credits among the Community Colleges, the State Colleges, and the University, so that more protessional teachers and aides can be trained in the development and learnin5 processes ot the preschool child,

DAY CARE LICENSING REGULATIONS THE COMMISSION COMMENDS AND SUPPORTS steps being taken by the State Department of Social Welfare to ensure improvement in the quality ot day care sewices rendered to the public.

TAX RELIEF FOR EXPENSES OF CARE OF DEPENDENTS Section 214 of the Internal Revenue Code and Section 17265, the California counterpart in the Revenue and Taxation Code? pro- vide that a working wife (or widower or husband whose wife 1s In- capacitated or institutionalized) may deduct up to $600 for child care expenses for one child and $900 if he or she has more than one child. There is to be a dollar for dollar reduction in the deduction for every dollar earned over $6,000 per year. It is suggested that $600 is not an adequate deduction and it is still an economic burden on the mother or father, as the case may be, to hire someone to care for their children so they may be gain- fully employed. Obviously the $900 top limitation (where there is more than one dependent) is wholly inadequate in the case of a large family, Likewise, the person who works should not have his deduction taken away by earning more than $6,000, particularly in the case of one supporting a large family, THE COMMISSION THEREFORE RECOMMENDS that Section 214 of the Internal Revenue Code and Section 17265 ot the Revenue and Taxa- tion Code be amended by liberalizing the amount ok the deduction to a tax~averwho ~resentlvaualities under said sections bv

eliminate the reduction in the amount ot the deduction tor amounts earned in excess ot $6,000, LONG RANGE PLANNING THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that the State Office of Planning be authorized and enabled to develop a long range plan *or child care services within the state, taking into account population and workforce trends as well as needs, problems, and resources, to ensure that: 1, Future public and private resources within the state are best utilized to meet needs for quality child care servcces of parents who are working, those in training tor work, those attending school, and those who otherwise have legi- timate need for child care services which cannot be met bv a familv member, 2, Information on unmet need can be gathered in orderly fashion. 3. Public and private non-profit services have a greater de- pree ot continuity ot tundinq. 4, Ways are found to structure, locate, and use group pro- grams to avoi ogeneous grouping by economic class wherever poss 5, New resources to meet overall needs be devised, Adequate remedy be found for special needs and concerns including -- (A) single parent families whose "breadwinner" must work night or weekend shifts, (B) care for the sick Id, (C) care for infants and the "older child," (D) licensing problems ot potential family day care homes in older neighborhoods, and (E) shortages of trained personnel, In reviewing. findings from the questionnaires , either singly, or in comparison with each other, the following points stand out: .. 42 ercent of the teenagers had lack of confidence in their abi! ity. .. The most promising opportunities for women would appear to be in the fields of space, electronics, research and the computer industries, yet only six percent of teenagers picked the science field, and only ten percent were interested in business. .. Teenagers and homemakers were of the overwhelming opinion that counseling programs were inadequate. .. Both teenagers and homemakers had almost no realization of the need for continuing education or the updating of skills even though significant proportions of both groups plan a return to the workforce after their children are grown. .. Most of the teenagers picked "dead end1' occupations, yet many indicated they would be self-supporting for much of their adult lives, and most women work from economic neces- sity. .. A majority of homemakers felt they would need counseling for their third span of life, and too high a proportion (46 per- cent) felt it would be available "somewhere". .. Women do not see themselves as "achievers" yet from the teenager answers, at least half of them will have to be unless they want to live well below the mainstream standard of living. , Prejudice against working women is a significant problem. .. There is discrimination in some education institutions. .. Women in very significant numbers do not have the necessary training at times in their lives when they need jobs. .. There is inequality of opportunity for women's advancement in emp loymen t . .. There is considerable ambivalence about men's and women's abilities, roles and responsibilities, and about what is ''masculine" and "feminine". .. Too few (only 30 percent) of today's young women plan a college education.

RECOMMENDATIONS COUNSELING SERVICES FOR ADULTS - The impact of rapidly accelerating change in our technological society has greatly increased the need for educational and vocational counseling for both adult men and women. Such services should be located geographically so as to be of maximum practical use and should be publicized so that all segments within the community are aware of them. THE COMMISSION THEREFORE RECOMMENDS that Cornunity College (Junior College) Districts throughout the state utilize their cornunity Service Tax Funds to stair and otter counseling courses tor adult community residents, and that citizen advisory groups, representing all sements of the community, be formed to serve as a comunication outreach to all residents in the district.

TRAINING OF PARA-PROFESSIONALS Most cities within California face a shortage of professionals in the "helping professions". Para-professional training of mature women now being conducted at some California institutions of higher education can provide an important part of the answer. Such training offers adult women a wider range of opportunities for service, and at the same time makes available to communities an added resource of trained personnel for the solution to com- munity problems. THE COMMISSION THEREFORE RECOMMENDS that paraa

i5 Higher Education Act. and bv other avpropriate means.

FACTUAL MATERIALS FOR SCHOOL COUNSEWRS THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that a continuing Commission on the

- ~ - -~ ~ -- ~ Status of Women.a the State De~artmentot Education.I and the Divi-- sion of Labor Statistics and Research ot the State Department of Industrial Relations cooperate in the preparation and dissemina- f-- - - - I-orce, their sequential life pattern and longer lite span. The new materials should accurately retlect facts and trends relating to the degree of participation, age, marital status, and wages, ot California working women, so that young women can be realistic- ally advised or their probable tuture responsib~lltlesand can training and education to ensure they are ade- repared to meet them,

COUNSELING IN EDUCATION THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that public and private schools at all levels of education expand in-service training programs for counselors, and that the State Department of Education and the Coordinating Council for Higher Education recommend steps by which educational counseling programs can be strengthened and expanded. CONTINUING EDUCATION THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that advisory committees of Continuin Education Programs throughout the state include in their membershi; appropriate representation ot women's groups to ensure that programs include courses which meet the needs of: adult women in the given community. and further, that Continuing Education Programs expand their efforts with public service divisions ot local radio and television stations in publicizing their programs and courses so that more homemakers are reached,

COLLEGE-LEVEL EXAMINATION PROGRAM The prestigious College Entrance Examination Board has developed a new series of tests which can measure non-academic learning in terms of college equivalency, Test results are being used in California by several institutions of higher education (California State College at Fullerton, Loyola University, Pepperdine College, San Diego State College, the University of San Diego, and the United States International University), and are also being used by employ- ers for hiring or promotion of qualified employees who are normally ineligible because of educational requirements for the job, THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS widely expanded use of the College- Level Equivalency Examination by Calitornia 's institutions ot higher education, and by employers throughout the state,

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that the state affirm its commitment to the educational development ot all its citizens, and turther recommends that co-educational institutions ot higher education in the state adopt policies ensuring that standards for admisssion and for financial aid are identical tor male and temale applicants in undergraduate, graduate, and protessional programs; and

'\ that action be taken to provide that California women who marry out-ot-state residents are not required to pay out-ot-state tees at public institutions ot higher education, it the only tac- tor which disqualifies them trom resident tee status is the tact that the husband is not a legal resident ot Calitornia; and that action be taken to waive out-of-state fees for non- resident American Indians who received t;heir high school education in California. CHILD CARE CENTERS ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that quality child care services be established on college camDuses for children of students.

PARENT PARTICIPATION COURSES THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that local school districts develo~ and offer parent participation courses on the impact ok changes in our society on families, youth, and adults, so that kami-ly, employment, community, and other relationships can be strengthened.

INFORMATION EXCHANGE AND CONSULTIVE ASSISTANCE THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that a continuing Commission on the Status of Women expand its "exchange of information" and its con- sultive assistance to local-women's groups, service and proiessibnal groups. school counselors, and others who can implement programs which strengthen family like and which encourage girls and women to utilize their capabilities and adequately prepare themselves to meet future responsibilities.

STUDY OF NEGATIVE AND POSITIVE INFLUENCES THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that a continuing Commission on the Status of Women explore appropriate avenues tor i-unding and con- ducting oi a study of the variety, source, and impact oi negative ng mi-luences on men, women and children regarding male and kemale "roles" in society, and which identikies etiective means by which wholesome and non-divisive attitudes can be formed.

WOMEN'S GROUPS THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS that re levant women ' s groups -- 1. Expand their efforts in offering their services to schools Tn group and one-to-one programs to encourage young women to take advantage ot educational opportunities ; 2. Work with the local business community in offering occupa- tionally/vocationally oriented programs ; and 3. Encourage local schools to bring to the attention of students dynanic volunteer opportunities in the community, "Businessmen have reacted traditionally in hiring and promoting women rather than acting independently and creatively, Establish- ed precedents have been the guidelines, Certain positions which have been filled by men have been steadfastly held in the minds of management as being physically and mentally suited only to the male of the species," "In recognition of traditional behavior, it was determined that progressive managerial personnel are desirous of shedding the ra ged cloak of habit and prefer to done a looser garb which will a1'I ow movement and freedom to hire and retain the talents and cap- abilities of persons without regard to their gender," Based on the study, ASTD-CAP made the following observations: REGARDING EMPLOYERS 1, There is great misconception on the part of employers (management and line supervision) and employees of the weight lifting law. The reason given most often for not hiring or assign- ing women to jobs was "the weight lifting law", 2, Em lo ers often mentioned the precendents "set by our cul- ture" or 'tridition" as reasons women are not used on some jobs, 3, Em loyers say some jobs are not for women because women donut app! y for them, REGARDING THE WOMEN THEMSELVES 1, Too many women seemed unaware of their opportunities, 2, Most women see themselves as "second class citizens" in the bus ines s world, 3, Women could fill some of the continually difficult to fill jobs listed by employers,

4. The negative self-image of women as being able to be successful in the business world needs to be preempted in their early teens.

RECOMMENDATIONS OCCUPATIONAL COUNSELING The ASTD-CAP study underscored the business and industry prob- lem of continually unfilled jobs (demand occupations) on the one hand, and the lack of training, and timely awareness of the need - for training on the part of women, Further, Commission research with counselors and school ad- ministrators clearly indicates that adequate and realistic programs of occupational counselling are sadly deficient. Few young women know that the majority of them are likely to work full time for upwards of a third of their lives, and that they will actually live and enjoy good health for 25 years more than their grandmothers did. Early motivation is thus lacking, with the result that much potential talent is wasted, and great hardship ensues in those cases where an untrained woman finds she must work to support herself or her family. THE COMMISSION THEREFORE RECOMMENDS that toward the comple- mentary goals of (1) assisting California business and industry to better fill "demand occupation" jobs, and (2) providing more realistic counselling oi girls and young women, that local school districts should take steps to train junior high school, high school, and community college counselors in more eftective use ot existing tools and materials, such as the Calitornia State materials. THE COMMISSION FURTHER RECOMMENDS that a continuing Commission on the Status of Women work with relevant existing: organizations to develop dynamic- new educative and occupational counselling tools for school use.

THE WEIGHT LIFTING LAW The California Labor Code (Sections 1250-1252) prohibits women employees from being "requested or permitted to lift any object weighing 50 pounds or over." The California Industrial Welfare Commission is authorized by law to provide for flexibility in the statutory law governing weight lifting, The IWC Orders, having the force of law, actually set a 25-pound limit, but with the proviso that the limitation can be increased to 49 pounds maximum if a permit is granted by the CommissionDs enforcing arm, the Division of Industrial Welfare. The.Commission (ACSW) asserts that the health of men is equally important as the health of women, and that the individual lifting job and its circumstances (how heavy, how often, how far, etc.) and the individual worker doing the job are more relevant than whether the worker is male or female. PUBLIC INFORMATION ON THE WEIGHT LIFTING LAW AND EXEMPTION PROVISION The interviewer for the ASTD-CAP survey found that 9 out of 10 employers (management and line supervisors) cited "the weight lifting law" as a reason for not hiring women for or promoting women to certain jobs, which almost universally they stated to be a flat 25-pound limitation. As noted above, the statutory limit is 50 pounds, and a permit may be granted by the Division of Industrial Welfare for weights between 25 and 49 pounds for women workers, Permits may be re- quested by the employer or the employee, It is safe to say how- ever, that many of the statens employers, and most women workers are either uninformed, or are misinformed about the law itself and the permit provision. Whether the law is changed or stays the same, clear and adequate information should be available to those affected by it, which is currently not the case, THE COMMISSION THEREFORE RECOMMENDS that the State Department of Em~lovmentand the Division of Industrial Welfare of the State Debar tmen t bf Industrial Kelations coo~eratein the bub-ri-ation-

PUBLIC INFORMATION ON THE EQUAL PAY LAW The California Equal Pay Law was first passed in 1949, and was amended in 1965 and in 1968. Essentially, the law states than an employer cannot have men and women employees in the same plant lo- cation doing identical work under the same circurns tances and pay one more or less than tmther. The employer may do so if factors othe-ant-ender of the worker apply, to-wit: "Seniority, length of senrice, ability, skill, difference in duties or services performed whether regularly or occasionally, differences in the shift or time of day worked, hours of work, or restrictions or prohibitions on lifting or moving objects in excess of specified weight, or other reasonable differentia- tion factor or factors other than sex, when exercised in good faith." The law also outlines enforcement authority (Division of In- dustrial Welfare) and states procedures employees may use in filing a complaint, The 1968 amendments (1) made it possible for a man to file a complaint (hitherto restricted to women) and changed the word "female" to "employee of the opposite sex1', thus bringing men under the law's jurisdiction and protection, and (2) prohibited an employer from lowering the wage of any employee in order to comply with the law. Because information about the Equal Pay Law has not had wide- spread dissemination in the past, and since the 1968 amendments make important changes.in the law --

FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES The California Fair Employment Practices Commission is current- ly empowered to investigate complaints of discrimination based on race, religious creed, color, national origin, or ancestry. The act creating the Commission states: ''It is the public policy of this State that it is necessary to protect and safeguard the right and opportunity of all persons to seek, obtain, and hold employment without dis- crimination or abridgment on account of race, religious creed, color, national origin, or ancestry. "It is recognized that the practice of denying employment opportunity and discriminating in the terms of employment for such reasons foments domestic strife and unrest, deprives the State of the fullest utilization of its capacities for development and advance, and substantially and adversely affects the interests of employees, employers, and the public in general ." The California act at the present time does not include sex discrimination as an unlawful act. Two federal instrurnents do: 1. The 1964 Civil Rights Act (Title VII), which applies to employers engaged in interstate commerce or affecting interstate commerce. 2. Presidential Executive Order 11246 as amended by Order 375, which applies to employers who do business under contract with the federal government. The Commission finds that discrimination based solely on the- sex of the employee is on its face unjust, and to paraphrase the language of the FEP Act 'I,. .deprives the State of the fullest utilization of its capacities for development and advance, and substantially and adversely affeefts the interests of employees, employers, and the public in general. I1 The Commission also finds as follows: Since more than a third of CaliforniaQsworkforce are women, and half of all adult women today are working, the number of California citizens concerned is a major segment of workforce and population; Since the percentage of workforce jobs held by women in Cali- fornia has increased by more than 250 percent since the turn of the century and 48 percent in the last decade alone, it is clear that the number of persons affected will continue to grow; Since the overwhelming majority of women who work do so from economic necessity whether or not married, and wer one million California women workers have no breadwinner in the family aside from themselves (and visualizing the added welfare costs if the latter category did not work and did not pay income tax), the financial need of women workers becomes abundantly apparent, as does the StatePs economic self-interest; Since 75 percent of welfare families in California are headed by women, and the State and Nation are engaged in turning welfare checks into paychecks by training welfare recipients for work, these women should not be denied jobs for which money has been spent training them, solely because they are women; And, if the daughters in welfare families are to have a new example to emulate, if they can be encouraged as young women to educate and train themselves so the welfare cycle is not perpet- uated, and if they are to have a pros ect for self dignity based on achieved self-worth, then surely t ge public policy of California should affirm that their efforts will not "die aborning" solely because they are women. THE COMMISSION THEREFORE RECOMMENDS that californiaPs Fair Employment Practices Act be amended to include prohibition of aiscrimination in employment because ot sex. FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS

TAX RELIEF FOR UNMARRIED HEADS OF HOUSEHOLD An unmarried person who maintains as his home the principal place of abode of certain relatives qualifies for a tax rate structure less favorable than married couples but more favorable than single persons, If a person has this status he or she should not lose it, because in many cases expenses do not actual- ly decrease, The most £re uent example would be a widow with children who go away to coP lege. The home would no longer be the principal abode of the child, but the widow would need to maintain the home for the child to return to on weekends and during vacation periods, THE COMMISSION THEREFORE RECOMMENDS that the definition of 1I Head of Household'' as found in section l(b) (2) ot the Internal Revenue Code and Section 17042 of the Revenue & Taxation Code be liberalized to provide that if an unmarried taxpayer qualifies as head of household on or after reach in^ the age of forty. such taxpayer will not lose the status of head of household even thouq %a %a household which constitutes the princi~alplace of abode of a named dependent; and that such Derson bv reason of loss of said status will not thereafter revert to the status of single indi- vidual for tax reporting Purposes,

( NON-MULT GROmS FOR DIVORCE, AND MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE COUNSELING The report of the task force on Family Law and Policy to the National Citizens Advisory Council on the Status of Women (April 1968) reconwended as one of the principles which should guide revision of state divorce laws that "the concept that there must be a guilty party to any divorce is unrealistic and unnecessarily creates hostility between the parties, which is often detrimental to their children," The Governor's Commission on the Family (December 1966) reached the same conclusion, The traditional approach to divorce which is commonly referred to as the "matrimonial offense" or "fault theory" has been criti- cized by many experts in the field of divorce law and human relations, To the practicing attorney and his clients the necessity in every case of proving one of the statutory grounds verges on hypocrisy and perjury, bringing the whole system of law into disrepute. It has been pointed out that there already exists a gulf betwen di- vorce statutes and the actual practice courts follow to allow dissolution of a marriage in cases where a marriage in fact no longer exists, The Su~remeCourt of California has already recognized in ~e~ur~ef. DeBurge, 39 Cal. 2d 858 (1952), thkt "~uglicpolicy does not discourage divorce where the relations between husband and wife are such-that the legitimate objects of matrimony have been utterly destroyed." The opportunity for counseling in certain cases with an actual analysis of the real cause of the family problems will do more for society's interest in preserving marriage than adherence in every case to the "guilt theory" and the requirement of adversary procedures in all cases, THE COMMISSION THEREFWE RECOMMENDS that legis lative action be taken to provide for divorce on non-fault grounds, and further recommends that marriage and divorce counseling be made available in appropriate cases through the courts in cooperation with accredited private and community kacilities,

MINORS STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS REGARDING PUBLIC ENTITIES When a person wants to sue a public entity, i,e. the State of California, a county, city, hospital district, city school, city busline, etc., he must comply with the special claim requirements of the California Government Code, If a claim is not filed accord- ing to said code no suit may be maintained against the public entity. The Government Code and California Courts hold that a minor, the same as an adult, must file a claim within 100 days of the acoruabf the cause of action (in most cases when the person was injured). There is a late claim provision but it is discretionary whether the late claim is allowed. After the claim is filed the public entity has 45 days in which to deny the claim. If the claim is not denied by then it is automatically denied. The person then has six months from the denial in which to file suit. However, a recent California Supreme Court decision, Williams v. Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority, 68 Cal. 2-, held that a minor must tile a claim within 100 davs. but does not have to file a suit before the general Statute of- bita at ions date for minors (Code of Civil Procedure, Section 352)--one year af ter reaching majority. However, if no one files a claim for a minor within the 100 day period,' the minor loses the right to ever bring an action. Usually this is through no fault of the minor. To insure the fairness and justice of the Government Code regarding claims and lawsuits by minors, the minor should not lose his or her rights until that minor fails to ~ro~erlvact after reaching maoGrity. By amending the ~overnml?nt-cod;, a minor's claim wili be viable until the minor fails to act, not i£ someone else fails to act. THE COMMISSION THEREF'ORE RECOMMENDS that the California Govern- ment Code be amended to change the filing date for minors' claims against public entities irom 100 days atter the accrual oi the cause of action to 100 davs after minor reaches his or her maioritv. LOCAL COUNCILS Throughout its work the Commission has worked with women and women's groups and has been heartened by the willingness shown by women s groups to work together. In several cities, women's roups have risen to the challenge of joining forces to survey focal resources needed by women, to identify gaps, to work creatively to fill gaps, and to find new ways of getting infor- mation about existing resources to people who need it. This work has just begun and should be greatly expanded throughout the state. THE COMMISSION THEREFORE RECOMMENDS that to meet needs of women g-on the local level in solving problems related to vocational and tional opportunities, volunteer opportunities, and other concerns, that local councils or committees of women be kormed to gather and coordinate intormation on local resources, to work together to 11 gaps, and to tind new ways ot disseminating such intormation that are ettective in the given community.

CONTINUATION OF THE ADVISORY COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN Many of the ~onnnission's recommendations involve actions which could and should be taken by existing entities and organizations throughout the s tate--schools and colleges, women s organizations, business and industry, professional associations, and government, all of which will need technical and consultive assistance if solu- tions are to be implemented and progress achieved, THE COMMISSION THEREFORE RECOMMENDS that a continuing Commission on the Status of Women expand its consultive and technical assist- ance to schools and colleges, women's organizations, business and' industry, professional associations, government, and others in ekzorts to bring about greater realization of the full potentgal of Calitornia women.

Several other recommendations--"Factual Materials for School Counselors", "Information Exchange", "Study of Negative and Positive ~nfluences", "Occupational Counseling1', and "Local Councils"--cited elsewhere in this report, deal with tasks for a continuing Commission, Much remains to be done, and the Com- mission is the logical vehicle to assume that task. THE COMMISSION THEREFORE RECOMMENDS that the Advisory Commission on the Status of Women be continued, ADVISORY COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN Members of the Commission Mrs. Betty Concannon, Mrs. M. Cravens Douglass, COMMISSION CHAIRMAN CHAIRMAN, EDUCATION COMMITTEE Partner, Concannon Company, Executive Vice President, San Francisco Douglass Mortuaries, and Past President, California Federation Mrs. Geraldine Rickman, of Business and Professional COMMISSION VICE CHAIRMAN, and Womeng s Clubs, El Segundo CHAIRMAN, CHILD CARE COMMITTEE Director, Community Opportunity Mrs. Kathleen T. Finucane, Programs in Education, CHAIRMAN, COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT San Diego COMMITTEE Chairman of Volunteers, Los Honorable Virginia Allee, Angeles Chapter, American MEMBER, EMPLOYMENT COMMITI'EE National Red Cross, Pasadena Chief, Division of Industrial Welfare, State Department of Honorable March Fong, Industrial Relations, =ER CHILD CARE COMMITTEE San Francisco ~ssembi~woman,15th District, Oakland Mrs. Juliet Ansley, CHAIRMAN, EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE Dr. Dorothy M. Ford, homemaker, former teacher and CHAIRMAN, WOMEN LEADERS LIAISON, personnel officer, and MEMBER, EDUCATION COMMITTEE Manhattan Beach Consultant, Business and Distributive Education, Los Mrs. Helen E. Beardsley, Angeles County School District, MEMBER EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE and Past National President, homemaker, Camel Business and Professional Womenus Clubs, Whittier Honorable Yvonne Brathwai te, MEMBER EDUCATION COMMITTEE Mrs. Trudy Owens, ~ssembi~woman,63rd District , MEMBER CHILD CARE COMMITTEE Los Angeles homema Ler, Palos Verdes Estates Honorable Gordon Cologne, Honorable Max Rafferty, MEMBER, COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT MEMBER, EDUCATION COMMITTEE COMMITTEE Superintendent of Public Senator, 36th District, Instruction, State of California, Indio-Riverside Sacramento Honorable Lou Cusanovich, Honorable David Roberti MEMBER, COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT MEMBER EMPLOYMENT COMM~TTEE COMMITTEE ~ssembi~man,48th District, Senator, 23rd District, Los Angeles Sherman Oaks Mrs. Antoinette Ruiz, - MEMBER, COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT COMMITTEE homemaker, San Marino Honorable Jack Schrade , MEEIBER, CHILD CARE COMMITTEE Senator, 39th District, San Diego

Mrs. Carolyn C. Heine, Executive Director, Sacramento INDEX -- Carolyn Cooper Heine

abortion, 18-19 California Legislative Adams, Winfred, 33 Roundtable, 15-16, 21 Advisory Commission on the Status of California legislature, 5, 7, 8, Women 11-14, 17, 20-26 child care committee, 10, 12-13, California Supreme Court, 20 . 22 child care, 10-13, 16, 21-22, 29, community involvement committee, 31 10 civil rights, women, 11, 15, 18 educatidn committee, lo., 13 community property, 12, 19 employment committee, 10-12, 13 Concannon, Betty, 9 public hearings, 12-13, 20, 34 conseiousness-raising, women's recommendations, 1967, 5 issues, 2, 6, 28, 29, 31, 35 recommendations, 1969, 9, 11, 16, 21, 23, 32 relations with Governor Reagan's Democrats, 5, 29, 30 office, 7, 13, 32 Deukmejian, George, 8, 17 relations with California divorce reform bill, 28, 31 legislature, 5, 7, 8,' 11-14, 17, 20-26 relations with women's groupg, employment, women, 10-12, 13, 24 7, 16, 19, 21, 27-28 equal pay, 25 Allee, Virginia, 26 Equal Rights Amendment, 14 American Association of Eu, March Fong, 30 University Women (.MUW), 16, 27 AFL-CIO, 25, 27 Field, Sarah Bard, 30 American Federation of Soroptomists, Finucane, Kathleen, 10 16 Ash, Marian, 4, 6 Attorney General, 20 General Federation of Women's Clubs, 28

Battaglia, Philip, 3 Junior League, 28 battered women, 20 Belmont, Alva, 29 Biondi, Shirley, 6 Kingsley, Robert, 3 Bradley, Melvin, 33 Brathwaite, Yvonne, 30 Brown, Edmund, Sr., 5 labor movement Warren, Charles, 24 protective labor laws, 24-26, 32 welfare, 8, 11, 23 legislature, 5, 7-8, 11-14, 17, woman suffrage movement, 29, 30 20-26 women, commission on the status liberals, 11 of. -See Advisory Commission on the Status of Women Women Lawyers of California, 31 Miller, Anita, 7 women's groups, 7, 16, 19, 21, Miller, Ruth, 27 27-28 Monagan, Robert, T. , 14 women's movement, 6 Moscone, George, 17-18

Zonta International, 16 NAACP, 21 National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs (BPW), 16 no-fault divorce. -See divorce ref om bill

PTA, 16 Paul, Alice, 29 rape, 18, 19, 20, 34 Reagan, Nancy, 33 Reagan, Ronald gubernatorial administration, 4, 7, 11, 13, 14, 32 Republicans, 4, 8, 14, 15, 20, 2 2 Reynolds, Nancy, 33

Senate Judiciary Committee, 17 sex discrimination, 10-12, 23, 28, 29 Sherriffs, Alex, 33

University of Southern California, 2, 8 Regional Oral History Office University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California

Government History Documentation Project Ronald Reagan Gubernatorial Era

Anita M. Miller

"THE TIDE OF THE TIMES WAS WITH US": WOMEN'S ISSUES AND THE CALIFORNIA COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN, 1972-1974

An Interview Conducted by Sarah Sharp in 1984

Copyright @ 1987 by the Regents of the University of California

TABLE OF CONTENTS -- Anita M. Miller

INTERVIEW HISTORY

BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

I FAMILY HISTORY AND FIRST CAREER CHOICES

THE CALIFORNIA COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN, 1972-1974 Early Milieu; Seeking the Appointment; First Issues The Commission's Structure; Hearing from the Community; Towards the ERA After Ratification of the ERA in California: Political Pragmatism and Women's Legislation Heat at Home: The Appointment of Women in State Government and Women's Advocacy California as Leader Among Women's Commissions; A Note on the National ERA Project, 1974 The Commission's Mandate

TAPE GUIDE

APPENDIX

A. ''California Women: A Perspective and Summary," Recommendations, Report of the Advisory Commission on the Status of Women, 1971, pp. 1-18. 48

B. "Legislation Affecting Women," Skirting the Capitol, February 20, 1973, pp. 3-4. 65

C. "Legislation Affecting the Status of Women," Skirting the Capitol, May 13, 1973, pp. 1-6.

INDEX

INTERVIEW HISTORY

This interview with Anita M. Miller, chairman of the California Commission on the Status of Women from 1972-1974, focuses on the coming of age of women's issues. Mrs. Miller discusses the establishment of the commission and its careful work with state legislators to ensure that the commission become a permanent governmental entity and that it have an adequate budget. She also comments on the comrnission's continuing dialogue with Governor Ronald Reagan's office on recruiting and appointment of qualified women.

The interview is particularly interesting in exploring Mrs. Miller's years of leadership in the Sacramento area American Association of University Women prior to her appointment to the commission and that organization's concern for passage of the Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. She makes it clear that AAUW's extensive networking with other traditional women's organizations, before that term was popularized by more feminist groups, was what encouraged the legislature to establish the commission.

Miller's interview reflects on the eventually unsuccessful effort to secure passage of the ERA and on a challenging parallel project which analyzed state by state, gender-specific references in legal codes and their implications for the status of women.

The interview was researched, recorded, and edited by Dr. Sarah Sharp as part of a unit of the Reagan Gubernatorial Era project which documented a sampling of the many citizen groups providing input into state government decisions in the 1960s and 1970s. This all-too-brief taping session took place in Mrs. Miller's suburban Sacramento home. Other interviews in this unit may be located by consulting the series list in the back of the volume. Mrs. Miller received a lightly edited transcript of the interview for review. In several places, in response to editor's queries, she wrote an additional sentence or two to augment her original reply. An occasional word that appears to have been lost in recording has been supplied in brackets.

Gabrielle Morris, Project Director

November 1986 Regional Oral History Office 486 The Bancroft Library University of California, Berkeley Regional Oral History Office University of California Room 486 The Barzcroft Library Berkeley, California 94720

BIOGWHICAL INFORMATION

(Please print or write clearly)

Your full name Anita M Millor

Date of birth 5-19-28 Place of birth Versail les, KY

ath her's full name Cr07ier L. Owen

Birthplace Versai 11es, KY

Occupation Busi nessman

other's full name Nannie M. Ford Owen

Birthplace Versai 11es , KY

Occupation Homemaker

Where did you grow up ? Kentucky

Present community Sacramento, CA

Education MA - Stanford University; AkCalifornia State University San Francisco;

RN - Bay1or,'Uni versi ty

Occupation(s) Consultant - Pub1 ic Affairs Advocacv

Special interests or activities c~mmunity/civi~volunteer activit.~;music, travel ; pol itical campaigns iii

RESUME

ANITA M. MILLER

EDUCATION: MA - Stanford University Major: education with emphasis in administration and personnel AB - California State University, San Francisco Major: education, psychology University of California, Davis Computer Certificate Program

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:

Director Governmental Affairs, California State Psychological Association - present Coordinate and direct legislative program for professional organization. Serve as liaison between Sacramento legislative activity and membership in statewide organization which is affiliated with national American Psychological Association.

Director, INSIDE EDGE, Consulting Agency: 1982-1984 Legislative consulting. Work either-as professional representative to legis- lative bodies, or as a trainer in legislative advocacy skills.

President-Executive Director, Institute for Studies in Equality: 1976-1982 Created and administered a public interest corporation to do research and public education relative to legal and social equality. Managed the corporation, recommended'programs secured funding. Coordinated activity: Provided information on issues relating to legal and social equality. Served as resource person to organizations for training members in-areas of leadership, participation in government, advocacy. Consulted with national network of public policy makers such as legisla- tors, governmental appointees, public administration staff, and media.

Director, Rockefeller Foundation Project, Equal Rights Amendment: 1974-1976 Designed and developed a proposal resulting in a Rockefeller Foundation grant of over a quarter of a million dollirs. Its purpose was to study the societal impact of conformance of laws to the principal of legal equality.

Organized and conducted seminars of lawyers, interdisciplinary groups of scholars in social sciences, national leaders in government, business and the media, in eight different geographic regions.

Publications included legal and scientific research materials for white papers, pamphlets, magazines and professional journal articles, and four books. iv Page Two - Anita M. Miller Commissioner, Education Management and Evaluation Commission: 1980-1984 Investigated governance and evaluation processes for kindergarten through twelfth grades of the public school system for the State of California. Made recommendations for legislative and administrative changes. Appointed by Governor Brown.

President, National Association of omm missions for Women: 1977-1979 Administered a national network of official governmental Commissions on the Status of Women whose goal was to effect improvement in areas such as educa- tion, employment and legal rights of women.

Worked with state, county and municipal officials in governmental agencies responsible for eliminating sex discrimination. Incorporated and represented the combined efforts of 157 Commissions in development of public policy nationally.

Chairperson, California Commission on the Status of Women: 1972-1978 Administered Commission programs - achieved 400% increase in budget and staff. Acquired funding for six major projects (grants from private foundations; governmental, IPA LEAA, and CETA) Served as principal legislative advocate for Commission policy. Initiated a newsletter on women's rights which was distributed statewide. Created and wrote a weekly column carried by over 100 newspapers in CA. Spoke frequently on radio, television and made personal appearances. Appointed by Governor Reagan.

ORGANIZATIONAL EXPERIENCE:

Natonal Vice President, American Association of University Women, Regional Director, -National Board of Director: 1973-Present Board of Directors. Educational Foundation. American Association of University Women: 1973 to present Develop policy for a professional/volunteer organization of 200,000 members. Design and conduct workshops in leadership techniques, program, membership recruitment and political effectiveness. "SPEAKERS SHOWCASE" - program to provide speakers on issues and programs on college campuses. Plan and develop national conferences and conventions (2500-3000 attendees) Represent the Association at Conferences of the International Federation of University Women (56 member countries). ~ele~ateto 4 International Conference.

Community and Statewide Organizations:- Serves as President of numerous organizations including CA State Division AAUW, Sacramento County Medical Auxiliary, Mental Health Association. Founder/organizer groups such as Sacramento Community Commission for Women.

HONORS : CENTENNIAL. AWARD FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF WOMEN, American Association of Univer- sity Women: 1981 Anita M. Miller Endowed American Fellowship, AAUW: 1976 California Woman 'of the Year: 1975 Achiever Award, CA Federation of Business and Professional Women: 1982 Page Three - Anita M. Miller

Trustee, Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation, Appointed by Pres. Reagan International Women's YearIDecade California Chairperson, Delegate-at-Large National Women's Conference, Houston, 1977. r California Attorney General's Task Force on Women's Rights. Appt. Evelle Younger California Legislative Joint Committee on Legal Equality. Appt. Speaker Moretti U.S. Civil Rights Commission, Califoria State Advisory Committee. Appt. Pres. Ford

AFFILIATIONS:

Stanford University Alumni Association California Legislative Roundtable International Federation of University Women Republican Party

Insurance Guide irks Women's Status Chief Bv Iris Yan~ Insurance underwriting manuals, which determine a person's rates and classifications, perpetuate false as- sumptions about women, clainis Anita Miller, chairwoman of the state Com- mission on the Status of Women. And since the manuals are kept confidential, she said, "prospective buyers are never informed on how or why they are charged a particular rate. "If underwriting manuals were open for public scrutiny, insurance companies would be forced to change these antiquated attitudes more quickly," she added. , At a Capitol press conference, Ms. Miller .said the commission wiU press the legislature for such public scruti- ny, as well as changes in health, disa- bility and unemployment insurance policies for women. "Ninety per cent of all health ser- vices required by women are fertili- .Bee Photo . , ... -. r.. rr- mcri,, 4~,,+ +ha - -. --... Sacramento Bee January 23, 1975

OFFICE OF GOVERNOR RL .ALD REAGAN RELEASL-X ,. Sacramento, California 95814 Clyde Walthall, Press Secretary 916-445-4571 7-8-74 #378

Governor Ronald Reagan today reappointed three members of the Commission on the Status of Women to new terms expiring July 1, 1978.

They are Bonnie L. Parks and Anita M. Miller, both of Sacramento,

and Dorothy M. Ford of Whittier. The appointments require Senate confirmation and the appointees, all Republicans, will receive necessary expenses. Mrs. Parks has been a commissioner since last January 14. She is legislative analyst for the California Chamber of Commerce, and formerly worked for Bank of America in San Francisco and Quantum Science Corporation in Palo Alto. She holds master's and bachelor's degrees from the University of California at Berkeley and an associate in arts from College of San Mateo. She is married to a real estate investment counselor.

Mrs. Miller, a commissioner since April 1972, is a housewife and full-time community volunteer. She is a past president of the, California division of the American Association of University Women and has been on

a national committee of AAUW since 1968. She was president of the Sacramento County Medical Auxiliary in 1967-68. She received a nursing degree from Baylor University, a bachelor's from San Francisco State and a master's from Stanford University. Her husband is an obstetrician- gynecologist. /former Mrs. Ford, a commissioner since June 1967, is a consultant for Los Angeles County Schools andwas field coordinator and chief instructor -, for the Administrative Leadership for Women program at the University of Southern California. She holds a bachelor's degree from the University of Kansas, a master's from California State University, Los Angeles, has done graduate work at USC and is an honorary doctor of humanities, as bestowed by Iowa Wesleyan College in Mt. Pleasant, Iowa. She is a past president of both the California and national federations of business and professional women's clubs. For the past two years she has been manager of peraunrlel and employment developmert for Southern California Edison Co.

OFFICE OF GOVERNOR P' 'ALD REAGAN RELEASE Immediate Sacramento, Cali forn-4 95814 Ed Gray, Press Secretary 916-445-4571 3-19-73 #I57

Governor Ronald Reagan today announced the appointment of

Carolyn J. Orona of Burbank as a member of the Commission on the Status of Women.

Miss Orona, a Republican, fills the vacancy on the commission created by the resignation of Deborah A. Fontana of Van Nuys.

A 1967 graduate of the University of Southern California with a

BS degree in occupational t3erapy, Miss Orona is an intermediate interviewer with a life insurance company in Los Angeles. She is also a graduate of East Los Angeles College with an Associate of Arts degree.

The appointment requires confirmation by the state Senate. Commission members receive their actual and necessary expenses.

Appointee 's address :

Carolyn J. Orona 4240 Sarah, #25 Burbank, Califarnia 91505

OFFICE OF GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN RELEASE : Immediate Sacramento, California 95814 Clyde Walthall, Press Secretary 916-445-4571 1-14-74 $24

Governor Ronald Reagan today announced the appointment of Mrs. Bonnie L. Parks of Sacramento as a member of the state Commission on the Status of Women. Mrs. Parks, a Republican, fills the vacancy created by the resignation of Rowena "Doodie" Taylor of Santa Barbara. Her term expires next June 1. Mrs. Parks is a legislative analyst for the California Chamber of Commerce developing studies of the economic impact of legislative bills on the state's economy. ~eforejoining the Chamber, she worked for Quantum Science Corporation in Palo Alto and Bank of America at its San Francisco World Headquarters. She received bachelor's and master's degrees from the University of California, Berkeley., Her husband is a real estate investment counselor. Senate confirmation is required for board members, who re~eive their actual and necessary expenses.

Address : 3716 Sherman Way Sacramento

McKelvey

I FAMILY HISTORY AND FIRST CAREER CHOICES

[Interview 1: May 9. 1984]##

Sharp: I thought that we might just begin by getting a little more biographical background on you. I see that you filled in the questionnaire.

Miller: I filled in this one and I also did a resum&

I didn't know where you got the information that you had about me. This is perhaps a more recent kind of thing, But it does speak to some of the things. You're welcome to take that if you w odd f ind that useful.

Sharp: We always like to get as 'much as we can on an interviewee. I had a note that you had received your AB from Baylor.

Miller: Actually. I received a nursing degree from Baylor University, and then the AB is from Cal State San Francisco. The master's is from Stanford.

Sharp: Is the master's in nursing?

Miller: It's in education.

Sharp: I wonder why you picked nursing to begin with, why you decided that would be what you wanted to do in terms of work activity?

Miller: It has been so long ago. You very carefully have not asked me how long ago that was. By way of putting this in context. I think if I were a seventeerryearold in this society today. I would probably choose to be a doctor.

##This symbol indicates that a tape or a segment of a tape has begun or ended. For a guide to the tapes see page 47.

I Miller: I can't remember exactly why, except to remember that I was interested in science and that type of an academic emphasis, but also that there were certain kinds of careers that women could choose, and nursing was one of them. It was not usual in my family for women to be encouraged or even allowed to go to college and to plan careers. My goal was to go away to school, to have more education. This was not a plan for a lifelong career at the time. It simply was what was available to me.

Then I did go away from home to go to college I grew up in Kentucky. My family were Southern Baptists. My mother could deal with the notion of going to a place like Baylor where there was proper religious sponsorship. It was as simple, perhaps, as that. My further educational experience after nursing school was in education and personnel management, areas that related to the clinical work I was doing at the University of California Medical Center, San Francisco, at that time As soon as I graduated from nursing school, I came to San Francisco.

Nothing very remarkable about it. It just evolved. In retro- spect, I think that part of the problem was that the questions were not as clear as to even be asked-if there was something else I could do.

Sharp: You also then had a strong interest in the American Association of University Women [AAuw]. Since 1968 you were on the national committee, which probably means you were involved 1ong before that.

Miller: I joined the AAUW in 1959, as a matter of fact. By then I was married, and married to a physician, and we went to Illinois. He began to practice there We were there a very short time.

But the AAUW is a community-based, national organization, where you have access to doing, I guess, stimulating type things. I mean by that either community-based or some kind of further study or whatever. It was just an immediate kind of entree into the community that we had in fact mwed to.

And I've been affiliated with the group since then. The resume/ shows I've held all the j obs except the presidency of the national association, for which I am now a candidate So I have a twenty- five year career, practically, with this organization

I don't know if you're familiar with the AAUW, but it is 104 years old. The basic reason for its existence is,in fact, the advancement of women--having started out initially to work on the question of women having access to higher education And through all the times, the evolution of the organization itself has had some very interesting adaptations to what the society was like in those various time periods. But underlying it all has been the Miller: matter of the access for women to educational opportunities, in the belief that education is the first requirement for improving the status of women and men in this society.

We've been very, very involved, as an organization, in the more current type issues: Title IX of the Federal Education Amend- ments of 1972, Equal Pay Act, Federal Statute of 1963. Most of the issues that the Commission on the Status of Women focused on have been issues which the AAUW supported.

Sharp: I notice in the '71 recommendations of the commission there are three or four that address the role of women in the university and efforts to increase hiring in terms of administrative work and executive positions as well as staff.* When you first started your work with the AAUW, I wonder what some of the specific issues were, if you remember, that you might have gotten involved in, or the AAUW was involved in What was the hot issue of the time?

Miller: The first assignment I had in AAUW here in Sacramento was as its legislative chairperson That was back in 1964 and '65, way back, early on.

The education issues in those days were not controversial like they are now. And they were not as finance-centered. It wasn't quite as clear-cut as it is now. But we were always talking about the matter of access to programs for women The encouragement of women and girls to be educated, and those kinds of things.

I guess I'm drawing a blank on what in 1965 was the key women- related issue. We were not yet at the point where the society in general, or the legislature particularly, was dealing with women's bills at all. That's the point--women's issues were not being defined legislatively at that time.

We were working on education issues. We were, at least at that point in time, very much interested in the K through twelve level as well. Obviously, members of the organizationwere parents, and mothers specifically, and the ongoing relationship with the schools was important to them. Whatever was current in those particular years--. It was on a basis of how the educational system itself was working and how children were treated as well.

*A Copy of the commission's 1971 recommendations from the "Report of the Advisory Commission on the Status of Women1' is included in the appendix following this interview. Sharp: We'll come back to that once we get talking about the commission because I'm interested'in the impact of AAUW members on the commission and on the commission's work. There certainly was a clear effort in the 1971 recommendations to push the efforts of women on university campuses.

I wanted to highlight your work w ith the Sacramento County Medical Auxiliary, what your involvement was like and the kinds of things you were doing

Miller: We moved to the Sacramento community in 1959. I hadvery small children at the time. My immediate connection here in this community was with the medical auxiliary, obviously by virtue of my husband starting his practice here. That was kind of a natural outgrowth.

I did the same thing in the Sacramento Medical Auxiliary that I seem to do in any of these organizations that I become affiliated with: I assume a leadership role and attempt to put some substance, I guess, into the hours and efforts that are going on I worked on things. For instance, scholarship fund-raising in the heal th-care fields. I remember one project that I was involved with was to have a health careers type fair at each of the thirty high schools in the Sacramento County area, for the purpose of acquainting students with what was available in health-related career opportunities. The revolution in health care fields along with major changes in health care delivery systems was just about to begin.

The auxiliary itself back in those days gave scholarships, again--in a very sexist way--just to nursing students, all women, which is very interesting nw that you're having me recall that We raised a fair amount of money on a yearly basis and gave scholar ships for nurses.

I worked on legislative things, again, in the various roles I had in the auxiliary. I did serve as president of the county auxiliary. In that role, I was highly visible in the community in carrying out an agenda of promoting an awareness of community health care, and of the health community itself within Sacramento.

The health institutions were not as much of a social lightning rod, I guess, as they are now. It was prior to really getting down to the matter of the right to health care and all of those kinds of controversial things. We were much more on an easy-going, hw-to- stay-well-and-how-to-be-part-of-tha t-process if that's your interes t.

Sharp: It sounds like you were beginning to learn your way around Sacramento in terms of legislation and meeting people and talking with committee members, for example. That seems a kind of skill that would have served you well once you got into the commission. Miller: I definitely gravitated toward the gwernmental functions and role that goes on in this community. As a matter of fact, looking back, whatever affiliation I had, through the auxiliary, through the AWW, through mental health, whatever roles I played in the organi- zations, I clearly gravitated toward the gwernmental process.

I can testify to the notion that if you mwe from the San Francisco Bay Area to Sacramento, you go through a certain kind of cultural shock, It is a small, provincial valley town with a very limited number of choices for personal entertainment or advancement. The gwernment process is what goes on here in Sacramento.

I also look back though, myself, and wonder why government became such a fascination for me I remember my grandfather, who was very much into politics. I remember as a very small child, just sort of following him around and listening to him, his exhor tations about which political leader was doing what at whatwer particular times. I guess you can wonder what impact such occurrences have on future choices.

A government career, or anything like that never occurred to me at all-I don't know when I would have understood "government as a career." There have been virtually no women in gwernment positions--elected or appointed--until recent years. It's highly unlikely I would have seen a role other than an observer for myself in the early years. But the affiliation now with the gwernmental process did in fact start back then

Sharp: Was your grandfather campaigning for somebody in particular?

Miller: I remember very definitely he was not a fan of [Franklin Delano] Roosevelt. Tb be in the South and to be in a Republican family has to have been very unusual. You have to remember that, if for no other reason than because, probably, until you moved away from the South you nwer had backed a winner. So I don't know what signifi- cance to place on all of that, but sometimes I reflect upon it.

And my family in general is very politically aware They have not held political office, but they have been very much involved in articulating the re1 ationship between what goes on in their lives and in communities and the public policy that's being developed. So that it is a lifelong connection that I've had.

Sharp: Was your mother involved in these kinds of political efforts?

Miller: Mostly my father. My mother was involved in the sense of being, I think, a typical southern woman, which is that they are frequently very informed but still carry out a stereotypical role I remember her as being a very, very strong influence in how decisions were made in the family, but always following the role of a "lady," and clearly deferring to the male head of the house on specific issues. Sharp: Fairly quiet about--

Miller: Fairly quiet about giving directions, but on a one-on-one basis, she was a very strong proponent of being something, being somebody, doing things, being involved, learning, that kind of thing, with her children. Though she hersel +I guess it was fairly unusual back as early as the--let's see, this would have been the late teens or early twenties.

She did in fact go away from home and attended school to learn how to be a secretary, or something on that level, but it was nwer okay in her family for women to work. So she was in kind of a transition, I assume; a strong influence in terms of articulating the fact that women should think and do things on their awn, but still caught by the rules of not being out of home herself.

Anyway, on the political question, the men did most of the deciding, but she had some involvement in that as well. She always took the responsibility of voting very seriously, but to my knowledge was not involved openly in the suffrage movement.

Sharp: So your father might have been a little more involved in local politics in Kentucky?

Miller: He was involved in local politics, again, in terms of just candidate support and community involvement and that sort of thing, and being very much aware. Again, we are talking about the thirties in the South It was a very quiet and uncomplicated time: small populations, mostly rural, with lots of things going on in an informal setting.

I can't say for sure whether he wer was a maj or campaigner or anything like that I just know that we always knew what was going on in elections and who was winning and all that sort of thing. From a very early time, I just remember being part of political activity. Of course, it didn't resemble too closely the activity I am aware of in elections today.

Sharp: I didn't wen look to see if it was a small Kentucky--

Miller: Versailles , Kentucky.

Sharp: I don' t have any idea where that is.

Miller: It is about fourteen miles from LeLngton, and about fourteen miles from Frankfort in the other direction Bluegrass country, farms, race horse s.

Sharp: You j ust had a very heavy-duty week then last week, with the Kentucky Derby. Miller: I was in the state of Washington. as a matter of fact Someone said, "Well, we know you're going to make a speech today. I certainly hope it does not conflict What is the time? We don't want it to conflict with the Kentucly Derby."

They were really surprised to find that the person they were talking to had in fact grown up in the midst of "Derby country."

Sharp: They had a real living example of a--

Miller: --of what happens to promoters of race horses.

Sharp: I was reading Herb Caen's columh He was somewhat, well, not critical, but laughing a little bit at the preoccupation with the Derby.

Miller: Well, the Derby isn't really a horse race anymore, obviously. It's an entrepreneurial' event, number one. I suppose it always was, but it used to be more localized than it is now.

.Sharp: I thought we might talk a little bit about the time that you spent at UC Medical Center, the teaching and administrative positions that you were involved in Perhaps you could just outline what you were doing, and we could go from there.

Miller: Of course. I came to the University Medical Center to be employed, just as a staff nurse. That was my first job out of nursing school and my first reason for coming to San Francisca I became a head nurse and clinical supervisor for the nursing students in a short time span. During this same time, of course, I was back in school again, working on the bachelor's degree in education at San Fran- cisco State in those days and going to Stanford for the master's degree. There was the combination of work and further education that went on there for a while.

Always, hwever, I was either in a supervisory role, like a head nurse, or combined teaching with the clinical part of it.

Then the next thing I did was to serve as a supervisor during the time when the Medical Center's Mof fitt Hospital, the teaching hospital, was opened. I spent two or three years involved in setting up the procedures and the design for actually activating the hospital. It was supervisory and administrative in a way. But it was a fairly unique experience in the combination of those two things. I was a supervisor for a short period of time after it opened.

Sharp: What years? I'm not sure I have the-

Miller: I first came to San Francisco in 1949. Miller: That was the last nursing work, though, that I ever did. I've never been in a hospital setting since then Only recently now, I do some consulting for a medical corporation But it's not in the medical care part of it, it's in the finance part of it

Sharp: So that would have been in the late forties and then early fifties. You were there six or eight years?

Miller: I was there until 1958, from 1949 to 1958. Is that nine years?

Sharp: Yes I would like to ask you to pull back and tell me why you think you began to get interested in women's issues. Then we'll start talking about your work on the commission and how you got on to the commission But just generally, if you could say why you got interested in women's issues enough to want to be on the cammission.

Miller: [It was] the experience I had on an ongoing basis with the AAUW, as it was the vehicle for bringing an awareness of what was happening for women in the society. That is because, I suppose, I tend to focus on a more task-substance approach to whatever it is that I am doing.

The AAUW has always, as I say, had as its basic goal the matter of the concern for the role of women in society, By just simply carrying out that goal in the various projects and assignments and all, it was clearly in that environment that I was in touch with what was emerging back in the sixties of talking about things like educational opportunities, salaries, and all of that.

Also. that time period was when I was, for the first time, out of the work force and had small children at home. I think a personal characteristic is one of my just wanting to be involved, wanting challenges, wanting to do something worthwhile. So the realization of what was happening to me--isolation as a suburban housewife. loss of identity and confined to social or child-related activities--motivated that interest in finding other out1ets for me.

I. obviously, am in a situation where I certainly have nwer had to work, and also connected with a medical person and all of that Uy approach has not exactly been the things that doctors' wives do. Think what that, back in the sixties, did to the image of the proper role of a doctor's wife.

Sharp: Or clergywives-- Miller: The rules, in general, were: you can do anything so long as you don't get paid for it His (the doctor husband's) status is enhanced considerably by the degree to which you do all of these great things in the community and so forth, and do them for no personal gain All that dynamic was going on

I have to admit that I'm restless under that kind of constraint. I was just ready for this to come along. That's all.

But I'd have to say it was the connection with the AAUW and the perfectly legitimate way, of course, of being i~rvdvedoutside the home a lot It was okay to go and be involved in those kinds of issues. I1 THE CALIFORNIA OOMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN, 1972-1974

Early Milieu; Seeking the Appointment; First Issues

Sharp: There was this other current that I'm sure you must have dealt with once you got on to the commission. That's the current of the radical feminist Was that a problem?

Miller: We didn't even know what that was about when the commission was first established. 'It was not established through the pressure of &-if I can interpret you to mean--a National-Organiz ation-for Women type group.

The groups that were most instrumental in working for a govern- mental commission were by my definition non-radical. If any thing, they were almost conservative: AAUW, the BPW [National Federation of Business and Professional women], the League of Women Voters, the [American Federation of] Soroptimist Clubs, the Federated Women's clubs [California Federation of Republican Women]. They're as near the center and out of controversy as anything I can think of. There is not a one that I knew of in those days that was not totally integrated into the community and the ongoing businessas- usual kind of approach

It was not until the late sixties that the National Organi- zation for Women was in fact established, in either '68 or '69, I believe And they didn't become a strong, visible, politically active force for some years. From my perspective here in Sacramento, as a matter of fact, it was a long time before there was a National Organization for Women chapter at all. There is still not a very strong one, even now.

We were largely women in traditional roles, pretty much a part of just traditional volunteer activity within communities. These were the women that initiated the establishment of the Commission on the Status of Women here in the state

Sharp: We'll come back to that. Miller: There was a little later time when divergent styles and opinions between traditional women's organizations and the newer feminist organizations began to clash And yes, there were some interesting things that happened between balancing off the radical vocal, hit- on-the-headri th-the-tw o-by-f our type process and the moderate, reasonable approach What we could do then as a gwernment commission was enhanced incredibly because we were so reasonable and acceptabl e and not offensive

Beginning in the early seventies, when things really began to take off in terms of getting legislation passed and that sort of thing, our efforts were greatly enhanced by the fact that people- public officials, legislatork--were really shaken up by the notion that women would behave like the National Organization for Women behaved and no one knew what to do with them. The more traditional groups could capitalize on that. And we did. If you want to talk about that later, we can

But early on, with the beginning of my getting into this, the who1 e question of any difference between women's approaches or points of view hadn't occurred to anybody yet.

Sharp: Did you seek a position on the commission?

Miller: Yes.

Sharp: How did you go about that?

Miller: Well, it was 1972 when I was appointed. I probably asked to be appointed late in 1971. I was the president of the California State Division of AAUW. That was a platform from which I could say how marvelous it would be if I could speak for womeh

But by then I had 1ived here in this community for a very long time and had lots of political connections and so forth I simply asked to be appointed and then put together the support from legis- lators, community leaders, Republican party leaders, and so forth, to substantiate that request, and then, of course, was appointed by Ronal d Re a ga n.

Sharp: Do you recall some of the legislative andRepublican party supporters that you might have had?

Miller: Well. John Kehoe, who was a Republ ican leader here in those days. A very close friend, and a close friend of the Reagans, Frank Belotti, who was a Republican legislator from the 1st Assembly District. He was from Eureka As a matter of fact, in my archives somewhere are the very interesting Frank and Ron letters wer the question of my appointment. Sharp: Oh, I would like to see those.

Miller: I'll beto get copies of those and provide them for you. I really have put things away.

We had no Republican legislators from Sacramento, We have had one only lately. But back in those days we had no Republican legislators. I knew a lot of the legislators, and I knew the wives. I knew the families. I went to the social events. I knew the governor, at least on a speaking kind of acquaintance, as a result of the social contacts and so forth.

That's how I got there The AAUW, obviously, and the medical auxiliary people, or whoever had recognizable names or connections did, of course, give support

Sharp: Had you worked on Mr. Reagan's campaign7

Miller: I was a supporter of Reagan's and always had been a recognized Republican here. I did not, as far back as that, really get terribly involved in campaigns. I made contributions, small ones, and did precinct-walking every once in a while But I was not a major operative in his political campaign as long ago as that.

Sharp: I wonder how the appointment then came about, what really the process was, if it was a matter of someone from the governor's office meeting with you and talking about the appointment, if it was just a phone call or a form letter, or exactly how.

Miller: I think it's a very interesting process, the way political appointments are made. I think there is a dynamic, a whole set of things that surround [the position] that are immediately appropriate to a particular individual's circumstance or situation

I think that the Commission on the Status of Women was not a high priority item.

I feel sure that the legislators that I know spoke on my behalf. At that time, their usual approach was, 'We don't know exactly what it is you want, Anita, but it's okay with us. You can have that. And we will help youw And usually this was accompanied by a patronizing arm-around-the-shoulder type thing. So the aware- ness of the Commission on the Status of Women having a potential for being a very important item at that moment of time I'm sure occurred to none of the players. I was not interviewed by Ronald Reagan prior to being appointed.

I expect my Frank and Ron letters were the basis on which it was done. I don't say for a moment that I would not have--that is, [with] the base of support from a major statewide organization, being a leader there and having some public recognition in Miller: connection with the issue. If 2 had been a person on his staff who was evaluating what would be useful for him politically, to be recognized for having a connection with a very legitimate--how can I say this?-pub1 ic visibility on the question of what was happening for women back in 1972-1 mean, it was a positive.

And I'm sure the AAUW's support and I'm sure the party's support, people from the party here [was helpful.] But again, the people who were asked to support this didn't really--I would have to say I doubt that it was viewed in the context of what it became.

Sharp: Even though there were these pub1 ished recommendations in '7 1, and of course earlier. The commission did publish these objectives periodically, so there was some awareness of what the commission was after.

Miller: Yes, that's true. My own perception is, however, that the commission really began to be serious about the pursuit of its mandate after it became a permanent commission, which didn't happen until 1971. What was happening with the reports and things that were being generated before then was that there was a limited circulation of them to legislators, committee staff, state agencies, organization leaders. The content of the reports was geared to the legislators' interest, at least in part, to generate the necessary knowledge of the activity of the commission, and the need for those activities for the benefit of the women of the state in order to assure the continuance of the commission and a budget with which to operate.

The commission's budget, even the first year when I went on the commission, was $49,000. And there were two empluyees. So the two empluyees and the rent pretty much took up the $49,000.

There was also the matter of the commission being in place before women's issues had been defined and were part of political agendas. The reports were one way of creating and distributing the lessons on the issues, These reports were generated and distributed to legislators as their primary target for discussion points in relation to proposed legislation. The legislators on the commission served as messengers for circulating the information. They also played a key role in being at least one person who would lobby or influence the vote of others on a legislative committee, for example.

Prior to 1972, moving from a study, evaluation, and written report to actually proposing legislation in response to the findings had not taken place.

Sharp: That's a real critical jump. Miller: That was a critical jump The commission was established by the passage of a bill in the legislature in 1965. That was possibly the very first women's bill. In 1968 there were five bills in the legislature that we could identify as women's bills. They were advisory resolutions, such as: "It's the sense of the legislature that women should be part of the society." [laughs] By that I mean that there was essentially no substance in the measures--and accompl ished nothing beyond pub1 ic relations value.

By 1975, eight or ten years later, there were as maq as a hundred or so bills that were clearly women's legislation

Sharp: That had to do with-

Miller: --specific issues. What you had mwed f ram, then, was an advisory kind of, "Wouldn't it be nice if we were all good human beings", or something to a bill that addressed specific problems, and included in the law how it was to be applied and sanctions for non-compliance.

But that transition had not taken place back when I first was anticipating going on the commission.

Sharp: Were you aware of the efforts of the commission very much before you got onto it?

Miller: Yes, I was aware. One of the ways in which I was aware was that back about 1967 or '68, in that general time frame, the commission established the California Legislative Roundtabl em which was a coalition of state women's organizations. The purpose of the group was to come together and to discuss legislative proposals, what the issues were and how to be involved in working on the legislation which was introduced. The members of the Roundtable were leaders in the statewide women's organizations.

Because of the jobs I held in the AAUW, I was part of that process. Not only were we aware of why this activity was taking place, but we were making a concerted effort to build a base of support for the commission, as well as working to pass women's legislation Our efforts were directed at making connections with women's organizations that were already in place. Given the tenor of the times, legitimacy for efforts on behalf of women's issues was gained through coalitions with these kinds of organizations that already existed-the AAUW, BPW, League of Women Voters and others.

The commission's outreach was to that mainstream, to &vel op its own constituency and extend its infuence through organizations which had positions of respectability and a history related to good causes. But, yes, I was aware of what they were doing. Sharp : Wadie Deddeh, it's his bill; AB 1006 in 1971 was the bill that asked for a permanent status of the commission

Miller: That's correct.

Sharp : I wondered if you were aware of it and then if you had really been imolved in helping them talk with legislators to get it.

Miller: I lobbied extensively for the adoption of that provision.

Sharp: Again, that lobbying consisted of meeting with legislators and just telling them about it and why it was going to be important, that sort of thing?

Miller : I guess my effort, the number of hours involved and perhaps the unique role that I might have played at that point in time, was more in organizing and generating others, district by district, to interact with their legislators on this point. So yes, the internal lobbying here in Sacramento, obviously I talked w ith some But I think my role was generating women's input to their own local legislative districts

Sharp : Were you talking then with other AAUW members? That was how it went out into the districts?

Miller: We talked with other AAUW members and/or we talked with other organizations, depending. One of the other things that happens when you're a very active community-type person--or working in communi ty-based operations--you go across the groups. We didn't know what to call it in those days. We now know to call it net- working and coalition building and all of those fancy things. But we were doing it in those days as well. So it would depend on what was appropriate.

Sharp : One of the main issues of the 1971 report was child care There was a list then of legislative recommendations on child care standards, and low-cost loans for renovation of child care facilities, or construction of centers and licensing--those sorts of issues

Could you comment on a couple of things? One, on how you 1ook at those objectives on child care in retrospect. And why was the commission focusing on child care in 19711

You're on the commission within the year. At this point, you're still not on it, but you're aware of what's going on. I wondered why you thought they were focusing on child care?

Miller: I'm trying to recall the legislator's name who served. Maybe you can remember that from having read this. There was an interesting circumstance at that point in time His last name was Warren Sharp : Charles Warren?

Miller: Charles Warren He focused on energy and that kind of thing later, and then went to Washington He was a member of the Commission on the Status of Women, and he was interested as a legislator in that particular issue.

I was not an insider at that point in time, but I would suspect that Warren, for political reasons, saw child care as the coming issue, that it had political implications for him. Carolyn Heine will be able to tell exactly what all that was about.

But child care is forever a central issue when you are dealing with the status of women And it seems to be forever not addressed. It had to be an issue when women were beginning to enter the work force The commission got a lot of information about what the issues were from this coalition of organizations that I mentioned [California Legislative Roundtable]. Some of the organizations that were in that coalition were in fact childcare or child-centered, child-heal th focused. They were always really energetic and all. That's part of where they came from.

Sharp: There was some criticism of the commission for focusing on child care, or being preoccupied with child care I think it may have come from groups that were more radical. At least I know that there was this criticism. I wondered if you were aware of it in the circles that you were working in, and that the commission had gone off the deep end in terms of focusing on an issue that was maybe important but--?

Miller: --not central to its mandate?

Sharp: Yes.

Miller: I can't honestly give you a careful analysis of what you're asking me right now. Let me just speculate a bit on what might have been going on The commission has focused on child care forever. The input comes from two different groups. One group assumes that if you have child care you should not spend pub1 ic money on it Another group has to do with, if you are in fact going to provide for child care you are going to destroy the family--this whole philosophy. Regardless of when this issue comes up, in what time and place, there was that kind of a back and forth on it.

During the later time period that you're talking about--it had to be 1973, just before Jerry Brown [Edmund G. Brawn, Jr.1 came into office-we had spent a year or more with in-depth child care analysis. I don't remember these earlier ones quite so well. But what we were doing at that time was trying to generate the idea that you needed on-site child care facilities for working mothers. Miller: When Jerry Brwn came into office, as a matter of fact, we got a commitment immediately from him that we would have three pilot projects in governmental entities for the purpose of developing this on-site child care process. I realize this is after Mr. Reagan, however the background for putting this together developed in the Reagan years.

But Ly 1972, '73, the whole matter of the feminist mwement which we came across a minute ago and more of a focus absolutely on what was happening for people in the work force, equal oppportunity for employment and that kind of thing was then more in the forefront. Of course, we went through the ratification process of the Equal Rights Amendment here in California in 1972. Lots and lots of discussion about all of these issues. And the disagreements wer where the resources of the commission might in fact be focused did begin to happen

Sharp: We'll get to the WA, because I certainly want to ask about the commission's imolvement

One of the California Journal articles that I sent you brought up the issue of abortion* I don't know if the commission actually ever focused on the issue at all. There was arguing by some groups in favor of repealing the 1967 Beilenson Act, which liberalized the conditions under which an abortion might be allowed. Those in favor of repeal were actually achrocating a further liberalization.

I wondered if this was an issue that the commission wrestled with internally and decided definitely just to back away from because it was too contrwersial.

Miller: The commission did not grapple endlessly with the question of abortion on the matter of being pro or con The commission was very aware of Gwernor Reagan's personal position on abortion and did not, in fact, take a pub1 ic role or an official role in the abortion question at this point in time.

It was later on, after Mr. Reagan's tenure, that the com- mission finally took a more definite position on the issue--not a leadership role per se, but we were very much involved. But then, of course, the major public contrwersy on abortion, when the legis- lative bills were put forth in a polarized environment of political opinion, happened after Mr. Reagan's tenure in office Remember, Mr. Reagan signed into law the Beilenson Bill in spite of whatever objections he may have had to abortions while he was gwernor.

*See Women's Commission Faces Funding Struggle," by Shirley A Bioudi, in California Journal, March 1971, p. 74. Miller: One of the things the commission did back in these really early-70's days, because of the very limited resources, was to try to focus on the areas where we could uniquely make the greatest contribution We tried very hard to expand our efforts in directions which would extend our credibility and make as many friends as possible

There were groups, of course, out there who were well grounded in the matter of what was to later be called "the choice questionn in relation to abortion, There were discussions in which we did in fact make decisions to leave the active pursuit of this issue to others who were already organized and in a position to work more effectively.

But I would say clearly that we were always aware of the political nature, vis-his Governor Reagan, on this issue We did not take the position that we, we as a governmental entity, could best fulfill our mandate and sere the best interest of the women in the state by making poor political decisions.

Sharp: Is that because you didn't want to appear to be opposing his point of view.?

11In the narrow sense I suppose that's what I'm saying to you

But the point I am trying to make is that what I felt in those days was that there were a lot of things that we needed to move forward on We were not going to get them all. Our policy was to concentrate on the ones we could get, that were politically possible. Now, if that's too much political pragmatism then I would have to say that's pretty much the way I think. There is a time and a place for issues to be put forth if they are to be successful.

Again, on the question of this particular item, it was not the front-burner item for the commission back in 1971, '72 and '73, partially because it was not being handled legislatively. If some of the legislative proposals on abortion that have come down since then had been in the process earlier, there would have been no way the commission could have avoided taking positions on specific bills. The political climate for the issue changed.

The Commission's Structure; Hearing fran the Canmunity; Towards the ERA

Sharp: Your comments on how the commission saw itself with respect to abortion as an issue bring up the question of how you saw the Sharp: commission's role once you were appointed to be the chairperson, what you thought the commission was supposed to do.

Miller : One thing that I felt very strongly about from the beginning related to the fact that the commission was an entity of the state gwernment. While the public members that were appointed by the gwernor were all women and came from strong community-based organi- zational type work, it was my position that we had a different type of responsibility as commissioners. We were not now members of a community-based, volunteer organization We were members of a gwernmental organization, and we tried to develop our style of operation as a governmental entity. That is different than partici- pating in nowgovernment organizations--such as women's organizations.

Sharp: Does that mean more sophisticated? filler: It had to do with political awareness and learning the ways to work effectively with the various entities within the gwernment itself. The commission members are appointed by the gwernor and leadership of both houses of the legislature, and are functionally responsible to both the executive and legislative branches of the government. This means that both political parties and each center of power of both houses of the legislature is represented on the commission The complexity of the interaction among all the forces that drive the process was increased by the fact that the issues were yet to be defined and the politics of a commission in gwernment concentrating on women's issues was yet to be assimilated.

So combining those two things, figuring out how a gwernmental entity works and getting ourselves into the system as players, was the critical piece. We had concentrated our activity in 1970 or '7 1 on getting the commission made a permanent commission

We then had to be worried about a budget situation Not much point in being a permanent commission if you're not going to have a budget. So as a first priority we got involved in the political aspects of increasing our budget and we were successful in doing it

So the roles of the commission that I saw were sort of combined in those statements. One was that if a commission exists that was supposed to address the question of inequities for women in the society, I thought we had the responsibility of figuring out how best to carry out that mandate, and from my perspective, it included those things which I've just said-it became a gwernment operation able to work within the gwernmental context.

It does have a de facto responsibility on an ongoing basis of building a strong relationship with the legislature because that's where the budget process comes from each time. And so we did that. Miller: And then I think that its other responsibility is being very responsive to its constituency out there through the educating process and that sort of thing. I think we reflected that in terms of what we did in developing within the structure of the commission the legislative liaison position, so we had an ongoing process in which we kept up with what was happening on a day-to-day basis in the legislature and communicated that information to the public. The publication of the reports and the distribution around the state, which was possible once the commission was permanent, was something that we did very successfully.

Then began the process of establishing commissions in the cities and counties in that state, not as entities connected with the state gwernment but as parallels in other governmental juris- dictions to carry out on a local basis where the work for addressing women's situations became a very real concern, It was our view that establishing a local governmental commission for women was one way of doing that.

Sharp: How were the responsibilities divided up among the members?

Miller: We established a committee system within the commission and as a commission set the priorities we were going to address; did this yearly, actually, and then various ad hoc type committees were established under that general plan Thobe were things like having a child care committee that was focusing on child care, or one on emplayment, or on education, or on criminal justice for women in the corrections system, I remember. Those emerged a lot of times, just the natural kind of emergence, from the interests of the mix of commissioners you had at a particular time.

Sharp: People would take their assignments for a year and then might switch off and find something else?

Miller: Right.

Sharp: What about Mrs. Heine? What exactly was her area of responsibility?

Miller: Well, she functioned as an executive secretary, just like an executive secretary of any governmental agency. The commission is, in fact, set up as a separate agency of the gwernment, with its own [budget] line item and administrative responsibility. It is not a subsection of something else. It was her responsibility to do the staff work in connection with preparation for meetings, the communicating process, that sort of thing. Miller: The executive is hired by the commissioners and is an exempt position That person serves at the pleasure of, as it were, the commissioners. All the other staff positions, of course, with the commission are civil service and all hiring and personnel matters must conform with the practices for hiring and management.

Sharp: Shortly after you came on, in the winter, there were hearings held by the commission They were held in Sacramento and in San kan- cisco and Los Angeles* There were something 1ike twelve hundred pages of testimov that resulted from the hearings that were held. I wondered if you could just tell me briefly about the hearings-- why they were held just to begin with

Miller: This was one good example Let me start back just a little bit further. What had happened in an evolutionary sense was that there was a period of time when the full number of positions on the commission had not been filled. There was a period of time when Carolyn Heine and the secretary were really there in their jobs, but the commission wasn't really up to full strength So there was a slight period of time there when the commission wasn't really doing as many things.

The matter of putting the hearings together was just one of the aspects of developing what I was describing a while ago--having a governmental agency act the way a governmental agency can in fact act. What I thought, and what the commissioners thought at that point in time, was that we needed to define what it was we were supposed to be doing, which was serving a constituency. By conducting hearings in a publ ic format, we got publ ic visibility for learning what was happening for women We combined those two aspects.

But what we were really after was hearing from the constituency what the problems for women in the state were That was the basis of the hearings. We did an analysis and summary, and used that information as the basis for developing the priorities that we were to immmediately follow.

Sharp: Did every commissioner go to the hearings? Was it by teams?

Miller: Too long ago to remember whether or not everyone attended. We had a large panel, and we had people who were part of all the hearings.

Sharp: It was a matter of people then coming back and agreeing on what the priorities should be?

*These hearings were held in Sacramento on 29 Nwember 1972, in San Francisco on 8 December 1972, and in Los Angeles on 9 and 10 Feb- ruary 1973. Miller: Yes. Let me tell you, to set up public hearings was quite an interesting process in the first place--it is a governmental activity we had to learn how to use Obviously, you invite arryone to come and talk. Lots of folks out there aren't just reading the paper every day to see about the opportunity to come and talk to a public forum. To generate a response from a broad cross section of people had also been done, to figure out who to ask to be a participant.

Then the logistics of getting all that put together. So there were a lot of people involved in doing all the necessary jobs. Again, we didn't have money and staff. So the people who were connected with the commission were in fact giving time and energy to do that.

I'm sorry. I've kind of forgotten the thrust of the question

Sharp : I was -wondering about how the commissioners set the priorities.

Miller: Priorities were set by the vote of the commissioners at a regular public meeting of the commission The subjects for consideration, again, were based on a summary of the information that we heard at the public hearings. We categorized the types of issues that were involved. and added our own research to further develop the para- meters of what people were talking about. We looked at it from the point of view, again, of what seemed to lend itsel f to a governmental agency's participation in trying to get something done The choices, obviously, had to be problems whose solutions could be addressed by laws or were amenable to a public policy type process. So we looked at those kinds of categories, The choices, also, needed to reflect public interest in order to gather the necessary support for passage.

Just on the basis of what people were talking the most about, which of course is partly a function of what happens to be going on at that time, the decisions on priorities were made.

Needless to say, in 1972, '71, the Equal Rights Amendment was being handled in the Congress and coming out to the states for ratification Heavy emphasis you will see in the transcripts on ERA, of people zeroing in on the question of legal equity, quality. I don't really like the word equity. Equality is a better concept.

Sharp: I wondered about the ERA and the commission I have just a bit of the chronology to pick up some of the big events. In October of 1971, the ERA passed the U.S. House. It was sent to the states. Then in March of '72, it was introduced as Assembly Joint Resolution 17 by [~alterlKarabian on the tenth. It was ratified the middle of November.

Miller: November 13, 1972. Sharp: So there's that several-month periodin the middle of whichyou come onto the commission I wondered, from the commission point of view, what happened in between during those months, and how was the commission involved in the process?

Miller: Both Senator [Mervyn M.] Dymally and Assemblyman Karabian, the principal authors, were members of the commission. Again, we were coming out of the time period when the commission hadn't met all that many times. while awaiting appointments of commissioners. But Carolyn, as the operative for the commission in that time period, had in fact prwided technical assistance to the groups that were promoting the ratification.

I believe the commission actually took a position in favor of ratification of ERA at the meeting in April of 1972, which was its first meeting after getting itself back together. The people who were involved as commissioners, individually and from various directions, including mysel fa were involved in ratification efforts in other aspects of their life, not necessarily through the commission.

The commission's role during the ratification time, I think, was largely educational, to the degree that, for instance, the pub1 ic hearings had been going on People were coming forward and giving testimony which related to the Equal Rights Amendment, which was out there, and the commission produced whatever publications it did. There was a public awareness role that the commission was playing. Though it wasn't all that organized. I guess it was a facilitator at that time

Sharp: Were there some divisions within the commission wer the ERA and its ratification?

Miller: To the best of my recollection, no, not then or ever, in terms of whether or not it would be supported, na The range of general political opinions that appeared on the commission was considerable For instance, I remember Senator Jack Schrade, who was if anything to the right of right He was a very conservative Republican senator. And he was supportive Ronald Reagan supported the Equal Rights Amendment during the ratification process here

WA was not, at this point in time, a philosophical problem. There was opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment, and that eigh* month time period for ratification indicates it But the legis- lature was-am I correct?-Democra~controlled.* There were a couple of years there when the Republicans controlled it.

*In 1972, there were twenty-one Democratic Senators and eighteen Republican senators, for ty-three Democratic assemblymen and thirty- six Republ ican assemblymen. Miller: The AFL-CIO opposed the Equal Rights Amendment in those days. And the opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment had more to do with people's political position vis-his their political support, that is the unions.* It was nothing like what became the battle over pros and cons of the Equal Rights Amendment at a later time.

Sharp: Did you have occasion to meet with any of the Assembly Judiciary Committee members? It was to that committee that the j oint resolution went.

Miller: Both as the president of the California state division of AAIJW. which I still was, and as chair of the commission; and I do remember testimony. As I mentioned to you earlier. I almost have to take out a calender to remember exactly when I was speaking for whom. But I worked on the Equal Rights Amendment for a long time. including getting the organizations I was affiliated with to. in fact, take a "pro" position on the issue. But yes, I did. I did testify. I did work with those people.

I worked w ith them in the sense. again, of the outreach to their constituencies, which the legislators needed to support their positions. When the proper mix of constituents said, 'This is okay." the legislator was firm in his or her position There were no discussions in those days about the issues connecting the ERA vith abortion, the draft, the family. It was on the basis of fairness. fairness and justice That's all we were talking in those days, before the rightring opponents of the issue got organized and took aver the public debate of the issue.

Sharp: You had some. I would suspect. fairly easy votes on the committee. because Charles Warren was on it. [Allister] McAllister. [Jack R.] Fenton. [~ohnF.1 Foran, [James A] Hayes, [Harvey] Johnson, alter] Karabi --again, somebody autom atically supportive Ken [Kenneth L.] Maddy. [Carlos J.] Moorhead. [Frank] Murphy [Jr.] and [~dwinL.1 Z'berg All of those people were on the committee Were there any of those who vere people that you really had to work to corn ince?

Miller: I don't think McAllister ever voted yes Since then, interestingly enough, McAllister has carried some very important child care legislation I think it was after the time period that you're looking at now. But the Equal Rights Amendment was not one that he ever supported. It was not 100 percent. The vote was very lopsided in favor. ultimately.

*For more information on this see. Tabor Opposition Stalls Equal Rights Amendment in the Senate." by Geraldine I,. Sherwood. in California Journal. April 1972. p. 112. Sharp: You mean par ty-wise? filler: Party-wise. Yes, pro and con And there were people on both sides of the aisle who voted na It was not, however, a strictly party- line, partisan issue in those days either. That all changed. Karabian was a very influential legislator. He was the author. There was a Democrat committee leader. All of those things were operative.

Sharp: What about the role of Assemblywanan Pauline Davis in any of this?

Miller: Pauline Davis was a person who preceded the question of whether or not women can be legislators. She was also, of course, a legis- lator who filled the position left vacant when her husband died. She was a very powerful woman in the legislature. She would not talk toyou, sometimes, or make promises of support She would not make public statements about what she was going to do or anything like that And she had a very, very good voting record. When the chips were really down, Paul ine would pull in her chits on legislative issues for women.

Sharp: She was-?

Miller: She was pro-ERA, and a pro as a politician and legislator.

Sharp: Over the life of the commission was Mrs. Davis someone that was always in the commission's corner?

Miller: She never, ever, ever said, "You can count on me without any questionn She was not a person who would have formed a women's caucus. She played a very key role more than once on our budget question Again, I'm not sure it's the same years you're talking about, but when she was on Ways and Means Committee assignments and chairing subcommittees where our budget was coming along, nobody could touch it if she was there*

Those were the kinds of things that were extremely important and [important] for us to understand, from my view. I personally was perfectly at ease with Pauline Davis being a legislator who happened to be a woman She did not have to publicly make any kind of statement that she didn't want to, as long as the way in which we were working with Mrs. Davis was on a political basis which allowed her to, in fact, exhibit or carry out what she felt she could do and in the position she was in And she did it I admired her greatly, as I guess you can hear.

*Pauline Davis was on the Assembly Ways and Means Committee between 1959 and 1975. Sharp: Everyone we've spoken with about this period of California state government has always had interesting things to say about Mrs. Davis. *

Miller: She is right here in Sacramento. She runs a shop dawn in Old Sacramento. Someday you should have lunch with her. Or if you have time to come up. 1'11 see if I can put it together for you.

One thing that happened that was interesting with her was that she was the only woman legislator, And Leona Egeland. when Leona was elected [in 19741. the press continually showed the two as contrasts. I certainly can't give more than just my personal impressions about it But it was a very good example of how the press picks up on something that sells newspapers. or is fun to look at, but is clearly beside the point in terms of the substance of the activity that counts.

It would be very interesting for somebody sometime to make some sort of an analysis of what kind of an impact resulted from that because here was a woman who was always painted into a corner [~avis], Older. all of those kinds of things. And here's the beautiful. articulate. the new generation kind of woman [Egeland] .**

Sharp: It didn't mean anything.

Miller: Not a thing. I was concerned about being sensitive to what that did to Pauline. Any person in a political office obviously is going to be impacted by how the public sees her, And here through no fault of her own, this very young, energetic Leona came into the legislature Pauline found herself as being forever labelled as her opposite. On the other hand. it kept their names before the public-a plus for political people.

After Ratification of the ERA in California: Political Pragmatism and Women1 s Legislation

Sharp: I had another question; I came across a note about a [~ob]Moretti resolution, which initially I thought was like a state version of the ERA I then came across ACR 33 which was Moretti-authored and which established an Assembly Joint Committee on Legal Equality, I wondered what they were.

*In 1986. interviews with Mrs. Davis by the Regional Oral History Office were in process. **See an article about the two. "Fewer Women," by Susan Sword. Sacramento Bee. December 9. 1974. Miller: Immediately after the ratification effort on the Equal Rights Amendment, the commission was involved in encouraging the estab- lishment of a committee, a legislative committee, that would be assigned the task of looking at California law to bring it into conformance with the principles of legal equality that would be mandated by the ultimate ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment.

Again, the momentum and the support for this particular issue was such that the speaker [Moretti] carried the bill and it was the Joint Resolution Number 33. It established a Joint Committee on Legal Equality. The committee was assigned essentially that kind of a task. The commission was involved not only in instigating the establishment of that committee, but served on it. I was on it, for instance.

Sharp: You were?

Miller: Yes. And one other member, Betty Stephens, I beliwe, a commissioner at that time, served for a while. It was a joint committee of the senate and the assembly. The work to put it into place would have been 1973 because the ratification took place on the last day of the session in '72. So the introduction of that would have been '73. Then it would have gone into effect in '74.

As I recall, the initial provision was for a two-year period. Then it was extended beyond that. There were public hearings and that kind of thing that were held. Then there was legislation proposed as a result of the findings.

Sharp: So the committee was supposed to study current California laws?

Miller: All California law. The Equal Rights Amendment said that the states would have a two-year time period to bring their laws into conformity with the prwisions that would be mandated by having a federal Equal Rights Amendment. We, simply, in this state, started early doing that in anticipation of ratification of ERA.

But the other thing that happened as a part of that process was that the legislature also put in place a routine process that said the writing of new law took into account the matter of genderbased wording that would be in violation of an Equal Rights Amendment.

Then there also was, at that time, a ballot measure that called for the remclving of the gender-based references in the constitution That passed and was done. That was all '73, probably into '7 4.

This was all just beginning to kind of take off when Ronald Reagan finished as governor. He's part of the beginning of it, but contributed to the positive efforts in California in behdf of legal equality. Sharp: I have a couple of questions. Once this Joint Committee on Legal Equality got going, how then was the work of the commission distinguished from this commit tee?

Miller: This committee's activity was much more limited and focused on particular areas; in other words, looking at code section by code section of the laws, or depending on the emphasis that a particular committee chairman wanted to pursue.

One of the approaches, for instance, was to look at agencies of the guvernment such as the Employment Development Department. The process was to examine how the agency carried out its work- looking at the matter of conformance of laws through the adminis- trative aspect of the law, not just at what the law said. Administrative rules which are developed to carry out the intent of a law provide rather wide possibilities for interpretatiors Pub1 ic hearings which required agency personnel to testify were held.

Some of the other activity was just the review of code sections like the penal code or civil code, and then the generation of particular items for change. The commission was doing all kinds of other things, carrying out the other aspects of its work while we were, in fact, having a lot to do with helping on review of the codes for identification of offending sections which on their face or in their impact created inequities for women

Sharp: This is sort of a hindsight question for you, I guess, but with the commission getting going, especially with the ratification of the WA, into a very specific path of pushing more to reduce the inequities in California laws, if Mr. Reagan would have come in for a third term, I'd like for you to tell me what you think your progress would have been, if it would have been different somehow.

Miller: Oh, my. Mr. Reagan's people were very cooperative Obviously we were operating inside We were a part of the errecutive branch of government by the way in which things are set up He was in fact signing the bills that were being passed. He didn't hme to sign the [ERA] ratification bill because it simply doesn't require the governor's signature But on the other things, he was in fact a player, I mean a crucial player. I can't imagine that there would have been any abrupt change of any kind. Let's see. That would have been in the years '74 to '78. Wouldn't it?

The political climate, of course, for an Equal Rights Amend- ment, and for other basic human rights, the equality questions, those type things, changed following the economic downturn that occured about '73, '74, or '75. The whole climate of a lot of these kinds of things that were up when there was an open, growing economy began to turn down when the economy faltered. I would assume that all of these factors that were going on at the same time would have had an impact on what he would have done I would Miller: not have imagined any kind of immediate change in his response so long as his constituency was the State of California, and the attitudes and interests continued to be supportive as it has been.

We were certainly having no problem with Ronald Reagan through the time he was gwernor. The time he was governor I don't think was a time when political leaders were necessarily staking their political careers on being the leader of causes for the advancement of women It didn't have that kind of political aspect for most of the time he was gwernor. But he was certainly signing the laws. And he was certainly conversing. And he was not marking us [the commission] out of the budget before signing it. I would have expected that general approach to have carried as far as it con- tinued to be the consensus of the California legislative and pol itical agenda.

Sharp: You did mention that when Jerry Brown came in, one of the things he immediately agreed to was the on-site child care facilities. I wondered if that's the sort of thing you suspect that Mr. Reagan would have gone for had you asked for it. filler: I just can't say. Jerry Brown and Ronald Reagan, in my view, having worked there during the administration of both of them, were very much closer together on fiscal matters, that part, than is generally talked about. Or maybe it is generally talked about. Jerry Brown's general personality, his notion that it was fine if one of the child care centers was right there in his office kind of thing-a Ronald Reagan would probably have never said that. It would have never occurred to him to say it.

The people that surrounded Jerry Brown were obviously a generation later. Their whole style and such was different. The proposal would not have been the same if we had expected a Ronald Reagan to have been a supporter, and I haven't a clue as to whether or not he would have been

Sharp: I guess what I'm getting at is that there is a lot of evidence that not only were women's issues not really a high priority for the Reagan administration, but that most members of the Reagan administration had a fairly limited view of women's roles, and how they might be changed in the society, that they were not intending to be at the front of any women's movement of any sort. filler: Absolutely true.

On the other hand, most of the time when women's movement type things have been moving through the political process, my experience has been that there were always lots of folks who have no enthusiasm for this issue, including those who are voting for it. It does have, in my view, very, very strong political necessity type arguments. I am convinced that nobody would be dealing with Miller: them at a1 if it were not politically smart to do, or politically stupid not to do. There were people in the Brown administration who had no enthusiasm for this either. I would have to identify Jerry Brown as an unusual politician in the sense that he was most likely to follow an unexpected course. By that I mean something outside or counter to the best advice of conventional political wisdom.

,.,They wanted to get the publicity.

He and Governor Reagan were in no way similar in this respect. There was no comparison personally as to how they would have handled something like that. But at this time support for issues had in fact been pretty much across the political spectrum. The matter of handling some thing 1ike this politically had become the right thing to to.

During the time between '74 and '76, when he ran for the presidency, Mr. Reagan's statements about the Equal Rights Amend- ment and things like that as a supportive kind of thing were still being used to support ratification efforts that were going on in other states.

I don't know. I guess I can't go further with it than that. I do not recall that I thought: "Oh, my goodness, isn't it nice he's gonan Nothing like that at all. It was a positive period. We were beginning to move along.

We had certainly come a long way from 1966 to '74. And he was part of tha t.

Sharp: I wanted to ask you about some of the legislation lists that I found. If you could just pull out the twa One is for February 20 and one is for May 14, both in 1973.* What stands out, I think, if you just sort of look at the two lists together is probably the variety. There are some bills that are somewhat less important than others.

*These lists are actually excerpts from a very informative newsletter published in Sacramento between 1967 and 1974, by Marian Ash. Entitled, Skirting -the Capitol, the newsletter apprised

readers of the progress- - of the women's commission and legislation pending in the senate or assembly which would affect women. These two excerpts, from the February 20 and May 14, 1973 issues, appear in the Appendix. Sharp: For example. the February one, one of the bills by [James E.] Whetmore, refers to the reference of councilwomen, that councilwomen should be a term rather than just using councilmen. In the same month is a bill by McAllister about instructions to jurors in rape trials. Those are two pretty different kinds of bills, One you might weigh mare important than the other in terms of its consequences.

Then there is a [Wadiel Deddeh bill on prejudices against women in insurance requirements. In May there is the same variety of bills. There is [Floyd] Wakefield's bill which attempted to rescind California's ratification of the ERA. Assembly Joint Resolution 26. Then [~obertH.1 Burke's bill, Assembly Joint Resolution 50, which dealt with abortion I presumed that meant abortion; it proposed a federal constitutional amendment to protect a human life from the moment of conception

I wonder if you could comment across the board on the com- mission's role in these bills. How did the commission get involved explicitly in either advocating support for some of these bills or not advocating support?

Miller: The commission's procedure for taking a position on a particular bill was to monitor all the bills that were introduced, identifying and reviewing those that had an impact for women. We had either staff that would help do that or the commissioners themselves served this function

As time went on and the number of issues expanded along with the number of bills on women's issues that were introduced, the commission developed guidelines for their philosophical or general position on issues. This was tied very closely to the yearly process of choosing priorities.

Before the commission had a position on any item, that kind of thing was done. It was in fact developed by the commissioners as a group, determined by a majority vote.

On the matter of having input to the development of bills, I'm not looking at one now that I'd like to say, "Yes, I remember we helped put that together." But on an ongoing basis, legislative staff talked w ith commission people to gather information in the subject area To the degree that we had the opportunity to talk with legislators during the dwel opmental time, we would obviously help, if we could, write language into the bill that we felt had some particular positive impact for women

Then in terms of what we did with the lobbying," as it were, if I can put quotes around that lobbying word. it's a matter of interchange with legislators. This occurred in a variety of ways. Miller: Legislators would not infrequently call and say, "I need help on this bill. What can you do in terms of making contact with the women outside and people from my district?"

Or, if they were having trouble with women from their district, either not to support, or not responsive, or whatever, the commission was requested many times to be a liaison in those situations. And we responded in those terms.

Another thing that I see as I'm looking at these, there were clear party differences in the kinds of bills that legislators would put forward. Lots and lots and lots and lots of bills came in that, of course, were not intended to become law. It was the ninn thing to be doing back in the early '708, to put in women's bills. Sometimes bills would be put in that were ridiculous on their faces

Sharp: Frivolous kinds of issues.

Miller: Right Legislators doing that sometimes w odd be perfectly happy to withdraw the bill or try to clean it up if that was what was appropriate. But they'd made the mark on the record.

Sharp: They'd done a wanen's bill. filler: They'd done a women's bill, yes We did clearly move between 1968 and 1975. In that time period, we went from the resolution, the advisory type--

Sharp: --to substantive. filler: Yes, to really substantive, really substantive bills. And again, first of all, being specific about something like, Ynsurance companies do the following and they should stop itnkind of thing. As a matter of fact we were very involved a little bit later in the matter of discrimination in insurance caverage.*

Sharp: I thought we would talk about that.

Miller: Really, very much interested. Some of that evolved from those hearings back then, where people would identify the fact that--

Sharp: --they had been discriminated against.

*Miller and the commission took on discrimination against women as expressed in insurance underwriting manuals. See article on the following page. Insurance Guide irk^ Women's Status Chief

LumMd Znsurance mderwrittng mmuals. which determine a person's rates and drar(iaeruons. perpetuate false rs- amptions about women, cMm6 Anita MWr, duirroui~of the state Corn mimion on the Status of Women. And since the manuals are kept ddentxal. she said. pro6peave bumare never informed on bow or why they are charged a parti- rate 'I undemting manuals rere apln for pubhc scrutiny. ~nsunnce meswould be forced to change tber antiquated attitudes more qmckly." she added. At a Capitol press conference, Ms. Nilla wid the comrniuior. will press the leglshture for suck public suuti- ny. as re:] a8 changes In hea!&. dlsi- bdity and unemp1o)menr Icsurasce policies for women. "Smet?. per ceri! of al: hdth ser- Bee Pholo vices rea~ud~. bv women.. -~- are-. fenill- tyrela!ed:' sa!c '>lj.Miller. .Yet the atrltgde of rhe !ndustr?. is that prep .bill MLUer nancy 1s a vc!ur.:q and ;ntentlonal mnd;tlon. and :berefore ineiigible for one They work not for f!nancial health beneflu.' need. bu! for perscnal mnrer.iena." For esanpie. she said. the loca! ..?bC ficc !s... ste id, .',ha: .K) per Blce Cross PI&: will Pa? S90 10 (100 01 the r.zt!on's w~rkforc~is for a Preenurn. k!the doctor bd wonen. acd :u-o-thlrds of aern work may cos: 53?j Eit40tl.and :he hospl- ,,: ,f 2bso;ure ecor.omlc nece=i!y, tal an~lhertM0 :a 8500. "Cnempioyncct inszranue dis The same company. she said. wsuld c,.j trs qa,nsr :he peMn =hers $13 ,,,, pay for an appendec!omy. sa:;r? ~.~ybe 3r much as 49 per wr,t >Is. >I~llerqugted fron an under of !he !nn!ly income b:; disqxallfycy ur:tm$ mama!. "Women's role rr. :he !!I:, u-xkcr fron iii?!. cornpensatron co~meraalrorid i 1s) pror.u~on;l! o! al!." a - -

Sacramento Bee January 23, 1975 Miller : "I'm a woman and I cannot get automobile insurance because someone's worried about my marital status," or the husband left or whatever. Suddenly women were left without a variety of things. Lots of things. We did m we in then to being very much more specific and assertive in advancing ideas for consideration through legislation And the hearings were the source a lot of times.

Sharp: CLues for you.

Miller: Yes, because we didn't have any other-. If you read our enabling legislation, it talks about doing research and public education and all those grand things. The fact of the matter is that the resources for doing that were fairly limited, and we had to get to those points. We had to get to the resources that we needed through whatever methods we could come up with One of them was, of course, people testifying to their own experience.

Sharp: The question comes to me about agendas for the commission and how agendas would be developed on what the commission was going to do for any given period of time. Maybe you could just tell me about that.

Miller: When I was chairperson of the commission, which is from the time I came on until beyond the time you're talking about [1972-781, I as the chairperson worked in cooperation with the staff person, and in consultation with the other commissioners to develop agendas.

We did develop in those days an agenda which had some potential public attention aspects. That is to say, when the commission came together for its two-day meeting in Sacramento, or wherever, we would put things on the agenda where people came and talked to the commission about our issues that were newsworthy, and we did the accompanying outreach ahead of time so the cameras would be there, for the purpose, again, of doing the pub1 ic awareness, outreach type things that we were talking about earlier.

The specific selection of what went onto those agendas where we talked about issues was simply correlated with whatever our priority goals for that time period were, or what kinds of priorities came forth by virtue of what was happening in the legislature, for the most part That was the way we did it

Then, of course, each of the times, we had the business sessions connected w ith it All the commission meetings were open, and open to the public We also were taking the position that we wanted to have meetings that the public would be encouraged to come ta We also thought about the locations of our meetings and the times they were held, and et cetera So we went across the full spectrum to allow the maximum range of interested individuals to be able to come to those. Sharp: There were a couple of California Journal articles that I sent you about appointments to state off ice. One's on appointments to the judiciary.* The other was on appointments to &ecutive positions.** I know you were involved in the whole issue of it because you're quoted in the March '74 one. I don't know if you like seeing yourself in the past tense there But there you are

I wondered how the commission got involved in this issue, which was, I would suspect, fairly sensitive

Miller : We probably went right in there without-- [laughter]

Sharp: Swinging away.

Miller: Swinging away. One thing you developed in trying to support this particular issue is that you just realize that you're either going to make it pretty soon or there would be no chance to talk about it again How did we get in on that? I can't remember exactly.

Heat at Home: The Appointment of Women in State Government and Women' s Advocacy

Sharp: In1973 therewas a report by AssemblymanWalter Karabian I don't know if you remember it. If I describe it you might recall it. There were all these things going on People were figuring out that there was discrimination, gender discrimination in Sacramento.

In '73, one of Karabian's assistants, Ida Casillas, wrote a report that said that 104 legislative staff positions of the highest pay were all held by men Staff of the forty-three standing committees were all headed by male consultants. I suspect maybe there were more of these reports, people were finding out, "Oh, my God, it really is all male-dominated."

So the issue of appointments of women to important and well- paid positions was sort of bubbling up to the surface I'm wondering how the commission might have begun to deal at home, right there in Sacramento-.

*See "Women Fare Well on Appointments to the Judiciary, But Promotions are Rare." by Ann Morris, in California ~ournal, May 1973, p.160. **see "Are Qualified Females Available for Executive Posts in Sacramento? " by Jennifer Jennings. in California Journal, March 1974, p.84. Miller: That's exactly what we were doing. Somewhat rapidly we got to the point of the recognition of the political significance of women's roles in relationship to all of these kinds of things coupled with the political setup where things were really getting through. The point being that it was time to say, "Put your action where your mouth is."

As a matter of fact, Karabian was very, very amenable to having these kinds of things pointed out Ida Casillas could nwer ever have written that otherwise. Of course, we, we were encour- aging that very thing as well. But we were reading our legislative mandate from a proactive point of view. If you were going to address all laws, practices, and conditions which create particular hardships or inequities for women in the state of California, all of these things, in our view, came under that general umbrella The time was right to do that.

We took an active role in helping to identify, and helping to have an interaction with, the appointments people and all of that. We continued to do that for a long time, not taking a partisan position, more a role of identifying where the problem was and why you should look at it, and then helping, either on request of the person seeking a position or the appointments people asking us to identify appropriate peopl e-appr opriate meaning qua1 if ied. We have all these buzz words we've used from time to time. We played an active role in that.

Sharp: I guess I'm still thinking that the commission's bringing this home to roost, as it were-. I mean, it's okay to support a bill that would change restrictions in insurance laws because that doesn't deal with anybody in Sacramenta. It does, but not very closely.

But it's something else again to say you need to make more efforts to appoint, right in the capitol building itself, women to higher positions. The commission would have seemed somewhat of an irritation to some people in the legislature, or wen in the governor's office who would not want that kind of mandate, or that kind of demand made on them. I guess I'm still looking at--

Miller: --at hm we felt that we could do that?

Sharp: How people would respond to your asking that it be done. It seems to me that some people might find that pretty irritating.

1 They did. You mean internally?

Sharp: Right.

Miller: The tide of the times was with us. It clearly, clearly was a time, politically, to generate the heat It was the mood and the perspective of the people who were on that commission to do it that Miller: way. That included the legislators who were members of the commission We have a seventeewmember commission, and six of those are members of the legislature The majority, of course, were the public members, appointed by the gwernor and the other two appointing powers.

But the mood of the time was in fact to do that. It was right. If you're asking me how I felt about it at that time, it never occurred to me not to do it And it would have occurred to me not to do it if it hadn't been politically doable I learned a lot in those days. It w asn' t that you came in and you knew it all. As the political dynamic emerged in that time and place, it had a forward motion to it. For the most part, it was supportive

Sharp: You mentioned that there were some, if I understood it right, ways in which you were asked, perhaps, to recommend women who might be appointed.

Miller: Oh, yes.

Sharp: Was that something that came from the governor's office?

Miller: Yes.

Sharp: How did you work up a list of people that might, women that might fill certain positions?

Miller: This was an outgrowth of just a lot of years of experience in a wide variety of environments, political, in communities around the state, or connections with people who had connections in communities. The network of women through organizations or other kinds of contacts, or whatever, was enormous by this time The kinds of things we were doing by its very nature just developed them at a high level.

I remember my own attitude about all of that was that: We will find an ideal qualified woman for any position you can describe." That was our position We were taking the tack that a qualified woman was not unusual.

You have to realize, of course, that we were coming from nowhere, when the general attitude was that, "The reason why women aren't there is because we can't find one that can do thatw So we were just taking the absolute assertive position that, 'Tou ask for it, and we will not only find you one, we will find you a choice." And we did that.

That was the back and forth that was going on in those days. We were in fact pushing as hard as we could on the basic questions of levels of pay, where women would have to be if they were ever to Miller: get equal pay. Some of those real low-level kind of things as well. Everywhere there was an avenue to push, we did. The matter of appointments became a very, very, very important one.

I remember we had something to do, as a matter of fact, with getting the very first woman into the Legislative Analyst's office.

When I first was chairing the commission, I would go to do testimony on our budgets. Then the Legislative Analyst's office would come behind us and do their testimony and make statements like. '1 do not understand why women have any role in relationship to government since they spend their time at home taking care of the little children.''

Those kinds of statements could just get one's spirit up and challenged to see what you could do to require that the Legislative Analyst's office in the state of California, along with all other government agencies, be held accountable for sex discrimination. The general attitude of the legislature and everyone who was suppor- ting the role of women was that the Legislative Analyst's office should do it too. And they did, which was kind of interesting.

I'm sorry. There I go getting pretty worked up about my own style of working on the problems.

Sharp: It's exactly the kind of information that I was wanting because I really wanted to know exactly what the relationship was between the governor's off ice and the commiesion, in terms of women's issues; whether it was supporting 1egislation that you wanted supported, or the role of appointments, and whether it was a matter of Ned Hutchinson, or Paul Haerle, or some of the other people who worked on appointments in the governor's off ice, actually calling the commission on the phone and asking for, or at least listening to, suggestions for women appointees.

Miller: It was Ned Hutchinson that we dealt with, Obviously, we had been appointed by Reagan. We were involved with the gwernor's staff. We had a good working relationship with Hutchinson Even though Ronald Reagan's record is not all that startling, back in those days it really was from nowhere that they were starting. Then, of course, this continued, really, through the [Jerryl Brown adminis- tration But the commission played the kind of a role that I just described.

The one thing I might say that would enlighten a little bit better the commission's relationship to the governor's office--it was not a povernorls commission on the status of women. It was a statutory commission, and had the rather unique structure of being put together so that there is a little bit of a balance of power involved in it Miller: A gwernor appoints for term appointments, and the appointments that they have are staggered so that, for instance, when Ronald Reagan went out of office I had just been appointed a second time-this time to a fouryear term. That was when term appointments were institutionalized, following the passage of the law in 1971 making a permanent commission I had been serving for the two-year time period under the Advisory Commission rules as a pleasure appointment. Then I served the next four years under Reagan's appointment, continuing and chairing the commission during Jerry Brown's term of office.

There are also appointments of pub1 ic members and legislators to the commision from the Rules Committee of the senate and from the speaker of the assembly. For most of the time, there are two political parties involved there The majority party usually gets two of the three legislator member positions, and the minority party one.

So you have a mix there. It happened continuously while I was connected with it that the commissioners decided what they were going to do, and hcw they were going to do it, in terms of priorities, and that kind of thing The commission's decision- making had to reflect a consensus of its diverse membership In other words, if it had been a gwernor's commission, then you would have been doing the gwernor's bidding. But we were not. We were cooperating with the executive while working through the total political real ities inherent in the composition of the commission and the fact that legislative proposals required success with the legislature as well as the gwernor's signature

And we are different as a commission, incidentally, than most of the commissions in the United States on that very point, that it's appointed by elected officials, but commissioners' terms do not end when the person who appoints them goes out of office. They may be the political spokespersons, but they are not the ideo- logical spokespersons for the gwernor alone.

Sharp: That really sets it out very clearly.

I wondered about the other groups that the commission would routinely hear from. For example, the California Federation of Business and Professional Women Ruth Qlurch Gupta was one of their representatives during the period that you were involved in the commission There are a couple of other names of people that I might give you. Maxine Taylor with the Nurses Registry and Profes- sional Nurses Bureau. Mary Bergan with the California Federation of Teachers. El izabeth Berger, California Children's Lobby. Margaret Beery, with Delta Kappa Gamma, educators. And Virginia Birdsall with California PTA. Sharp: How would you hear from them? Was it exclusively by issue, when an issue came up that the representatives wanted to--

Miller: Most of those you mentioned were operating in the California Legis- lative Roundtable that I mentioned before. The commission through all the years maintained that liaison, helped to keep it going, helped to staff it, helped to do whatever was necessary. So we had an ongoing roundtable that was there As an outgrowth of that, the commission had contact with all the groups always in place. This coalition was identifying the kinds of issues that needed to be focused on So it was just a natural outgrowth of that, which enabled the ongoing conversations and exchange of information on both politics and issues

The commission was depended upon in large measure for pulling to- gether the information and supplying it to these groups on request. That function was a highly pervasive one that we did. So groups contacted us. We were, on a daily basis, like in the halls of the capitol, or wherever we happened to be, or in our office, very much in touch with each other. So it was a coalitional group.

Also, by the time we got to this point--you didn't mention them there-the National Organization for Women had in fact come into being and had an on-site presence. Jerry Sherwood was their lobbyist for a long, long time.

The nature of the groups now involved in this whole complex that I've just been talking about cuvered a broader spectrum within the women's constituency.

Sharp: That's sort of what I thought.

Cal if ornia As Leader Among W men' s Commissions; A Note on the National ERA Project, 1974

Sharp: At the same time that you were chairman of the commission, then, you were also president of the National Association of--

Miller: -of Commissions for Wmen?

Sharp: -of Commissions for Women. The question is sort of natural, how California was different or alike what the other states were going through in this period in the area of women's issues-if you have some perspective?

Miller: California always, in these environments, was a leader among commissions in several senses. One, the amount of money we got to operate-we secured to operate, that is. The fact of having a

I Miller: supportive legislature. And then the other kinds of things we did, such as creating and managing projects for which we had secured private foundation or government grants. To the degree that California is different from other states in all kinds of aspects, I think we probably exemplified that same kind of difference in comparison to other commissions.

There were areas around the country where there were very strong commissions. 'hey made up the really strong components of the National Association of Commissions. They were in places like Washington state, and Wisconsin, Michigan, Massachusetts, come to mind, Pennsylvania

We were a very strong coal itioa The national association was, of course, just that, a coalition of commissions. We were all operating under different governmental jurisdictions, obviously. There was never anything except just coming together and deter mining, to the degree that we could, where issues were national issues, and comparing political strategies.

Sharp: So you might have shared not only what each other was doing, but also ways that you might work better, or just shared skills in terms of dealing w ith legislators or gwernors? Because all the states were different and all the situations were different.

Miller: Exactly. This coal ition, or this out-of-state kind of experience, did in fact do that As a matter of fact, the ability of the commissions to come together in the early days when commissions existed allowed an exciting forum for learning how commissions could, in fact, operate for the purpose of carrying out their various legislative mandates. And the mandates were pretty similar everywhere, in spite of differences in the way commissions were structured.

We received grants from the [u.s] Department of Labor, for instance, nationally to do particular kinds of projects. The Women's Bureau under the Department of Labor was very supportive of commission activities all wer the country. They were supportive both in expert advice, consul tation of one kind and another in the development of the designs for not only the commission themselves but also for this organization, the National Association of Conmnis sions for Wanen.

The Women's Bureau doesn't get very much attention But of course it has been there now about sixty years. I think the role they played in terms of supplying some financial background for the meetings of the national association was very essential. And that began meeting back in 1971. Sharp: Oh, it did?

Miller: Yes.

Sharp: I wasn't sure when that did happen

I hgve just a couple of last questions. You mentioned to pe about the Rockefeller project* I know that that didn't start really until 1974, but maybe you could just briefly tell me what it was so that we have some information on it.

Miller: Obviously it was the commission that put it forward. Actually I put it together, applied for a grant to study the conformance of laws to the principle of legal equality. We put the proposal together in 1973, assuming the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment by 1974.

Our proposal was developed on just exactly the same concept that had been the basis for getting a committee in the California legislature to begin to review California laws to identify statutes which would hsve to be changed under ERA That was the objective of that grant, to do the stateby-state review of laws and to come up with some model proposals for changes. There are certain areas of the codes natiomvide where the great offenses take place.

So it was to work toward the matter of identifying what the problems were. What we were concerned about was that the confor mance of laws to the requirements of an Equal Rights Amendment would be done maybe by a computer printout on all genderof fending words or something like that What we realized was that the impact of what the law does is the key piece--not just the presence of gender-based language. One must examine laws which either in their impact or on their face are discriminatory.

We were granted $288,000, and it was a two-year study. We convened legal people to work out hw to go about doing what we wanted to do, and then had consultants who were experts in particular disciplines that worked to develop materials in those areas. We held conferences in regions throughout the country so that we were able to examine on an area-by-area basis the kinds of differences that existed in laws, and how the society would be affected by all this. And then we produced and distributed publi- cations for public education, with lots of public visibility in relationship to it

*Between 1974 and 1976 Miller directed the National Equal Rights Amendment Project. Miller: What happened, of course, was that ERA wasn't ratified in 1974. In fact, by 1975 the opposition to the ERA had mounted its platform and was in full swing. A lot of the information that was brought together under the Rockefeller project was the only information that had ever been systematically put together on the issue So it was used a lot by people throughout the country for backup for the kind of ratification efforts that were going on various states.

As a matter of fact, Orrin Hatch is holding ERA hearings at the federal level off and on, right now. He is in total opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment. I have been interested lately, as I have been traveling around, to find that people are using our material as documentation for opposing the Equal Rights Amendment in these hearings.

Sharp: Sort of the wrong kind of ammunition.

Miller: Right, which was not, of course, our intention We were proponents. There is no doubt about that But we were also coming from the mindset that it was going to be ratified. We were not arguing vhether or not we were going to have an ERA; our perspective was, Wow that we have it, how's it going to look?" And, "What are we going to do about it on these specific items?"

We had four areas: family law, education, employment, and criminal law. Those were the focus areas. That's what we were trying to examine What is going to happen when you remove the built-in discriminatory practices-genderbased differences which make the application of the law different for individuals solely because of the sex of the individual.

Sharp: How does California look in that kind of study? You'd been looking at California discriminatory practices for a long time, before you did the study. I'm wondering what sort of contrast or comparison California might have been to--

Miller: -to other states? California was in a better condition all the way around than a lot Even among the eight community property states that exist, of which it is one.

We had a community property situation, for instance, in which women had equal interest, but the man had absolute power of manage- ment and control. She could have an interest, but he was the one vho acted in behalf of her interest or not, at his discretion The matter of changing that kind of thing was a difficult task even in our progressive edightened state Sounds simple, but it represents a maj or shif ring of power. Miller: Louisiana, for instance, had the same question of how they were going to fix their community property prwision about control. They were still talking about moving from a law that said that the man is the head and master of the house. Their legislature dealt with it, even up until virtually today, by trying to figure out what percentage of control would constitute equal power. The best proposals were that the man gets 60 percent of control and the woman 40. All these kinds of things suggest the level of action which passed for serious consideration of the basic problem.

So the comparison just in that one single instance would show that California, in a lot of ways, was way ahead. Nevertheless, if a man has absolute power of management and control, there is no such thing as community property. De facto it is something else There were areas like that where Californians were just about as bad off as everyone else, and other areas where laws were much more amenabl e to easy change.

Obviously the place where you come down to the real, real problems are under the family law provisions. What happens to women and children when you begin to talk about equalizing the way the society is organized around those things? There are some very, very deep and difficult questions. It's not just a political question then. And it's not just a matter of saying, "Okay, from now on we'll just use the word 'spouse' instead of words like husband and wife, man and womarq" and the standards of legal equality will be achieved.

Sharp: What's an example of some of the family law problems that you're speaking of? Maybe we could get a little more specific about an issue.

Miller: Basically, our legal system reflects the historical assumption that when people marry they become one-the man. All aspects of the marriage/fam ily relationship deal with the consequences of two individuals having merged their legal rights.

The law is totally involved in this process from the granting of a 1icense to regulating by law just about everything from names to be used to how you dissolve it. Included in this range of possibilities is domicile, property ownership, children and who is responsible for them. And of course, the complexity of this consideration is made most evident in case of dissolution.

Sharp: You mean in a divorce situation?

Miller: Yes. The problems of the werlapping interests are pretty obvious with the attempt to separate the individual legal interests of each person involved--man, woman, child--in a fair and equitable manner. Miller : This action indudes divorce, property, custody, spousal support, child support, economic responsibility. It was no Qubt a much easier process when there was the assumption that some people were mare equal than others--and when that assmption was consistent with society's acceptance of that fact.

I guess the point we were trying to make is that reviewing laws to determine which ones contain prwisions which discriminate on the basis of sex, some code sections were easy, others go to the very heart of our cultural biases as well as some major instances of the exercise of pwer and control of one individual wer another. Those were not easy to change.

Incidentally, family law might be an obvious example, but one of the California codes that was the most offensive was the penal code. What's built into the law is the assumption that women shouldn't be prisoners. So the prwisions about what you do with the woman in a prison setup were just incredible One of the early laws we worked on was to allow women the opportunity, like men were allowed, for some kind of vocational training, for learning a means to rehabilitation or reentry into the society.

Sharp: And that was not provided beforehand?

Miller: No way. Women were sentenced to longer terms for the same crimes. The underlying general principle, of course, was the concept of that if you're so bad you've got to be locked up--

Sharp: Then it should be a longer time.

Miller: Then it's a longer time.

On the other side of that coin would be, of course, the matter of women not being incarcerated at all because you couldn't inter nalize the notion that wamen were criminals. We had some really interesting experiences with these issues. If you really go into that particular section of the California code, it's just incredible.

The Commission' s Mandate

Sharp: My last question is really a chance for you just to step back and look at the whole thing. I'm wondering what you thought your responsibility was, what you thought you were personally supposed to do as the chairperson of the commission. Miller: Well, I took very seriously my role in being the chairperson of the commission I probably would have taken my role seriously if I'd only been a commissioner. I approached it from the angle that the statute which created the commission was in place by virtue of having been responsive to the real needs of women in California. And I view the role of people in pub1 ic service as being accountable to the needs of the public

I saw my role as contributing a maximum amount of energy, intelligence, whatever I had at my disposal, to involving the commission in the task that it was assigned to do. I guess that's it. That's it in a nutshell.

I would say that I saw us doing what we were there to do, to carry out the commission's mandate and to strengthen and secure the commission as an entity to the degree that we could. That is to say, once it became a permanent commission--and we had worked to get that done--it seemed to me it was essential to see to it that it was funded.

The budget process, which goes on continuously from year to year, and the educating process for those within the government itsel f, became top priorities for me We learned how the funding process worked and achieved success through the process in keeping and increasing commission funding

I thought it was our responsibility to be responsive to the legislature The legislation creating the commission included the requirement that it report to the legislature wery two years about its activity. I tried very hard to make those authentic reports; even though the law didn't spell out what the report was to look like, we never sent just a letter. Commission reports were the most complete account of what it was we were doing. and why it needed to be done, that we could produce We saw it as an educating tool, another part of our mandate.

I thought it was my responsibility to be responsive to the political environment in which I was operating. especially because it is a political environment. But I really saw myself as being in a position to respond to the legislative mandate as to why we were there, rather than to be accountable to my particular political appointer.

Sharp: But I'm wondering more about you personally, about how you thought about what you were doing.

Miller: You mean in terms of the issues, how I did what I did and all that?

Sharp: Yes. Miller: I was already committed to the notion that there was work that needed to be done on behalf of women and the question of inequities, laws, practices, conditions and et cetera that surrounded their life I was personally very aware of those and personally very committed to working on them. That was the motivation for asking to be involved in this environment in the first place.

I enjoyed what I was doing personally. I enjoyed the interchanges that took place between all the players in the public pol icy/political process--el ected officials, agencies, the media, and the public I thrived on the demands of identifying Ways to advance our issues to the forefront, and I enj oyed the exercise of political skill to pursue them. I was very much involved at a time in which the public was becoming aware of what was going on and the political response was positive I liked being a leader at such a time I found that a very exciting time

Sharp: I would think so.

Transcriber: Ernest Galvan Final vpist: Serena Herr TAPE GUIDE -- Anita M. Miller

Date of Interview: May 9, 1984 Tape 1, side A Tape 1, side B Tape 2, side A Tape 2, side B Tape 3, side A Tape 3, side B [not recorded] APPENDIX A 4 8 from Report of the Advisory Cmission on the Status of Women,lg71 CALIFORNIA WOMEN: A PERSPECTIVE AND SUMMARY

"1 feel I am more aware of a women's role in the present and the future. I am so glad that someone is concerned... I had thought the society only cared about what happens to boys. I have more encouragement to go on." This statement is typical of the reactions of 77 teen-age girls who took part in a Commission pilot project to test effectiveness of new motivational tools designed to help girls plan more realistically for their lives. The project itself is typical of the new approach the Com- mission has taken to its work -- action projects aimed at development of replicable materials and programs to meet needs uncovered in its earlier work, coupled with technical and con- sultive assistance given in response to hundreds of requests from individuals and a wide range of groups in government and the private sector throughout the state. The Commission, which is composed of 6 members of the Legislature, 9 members of the public, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, and the Chief of the Division of Indus- trial Welfare of the State Department of Industrial Relations, was created by the Legislature to examine the changing roles and responsibilities of women in California, the impact of such changes on women and on society, and to make recommendations which will enable more women to contribute fully to the society. The Commissionf s prior reports, transcripts of public hear- in s, and other detailed materials (see page 78 ) are avail- ab f e from the Commission office. Although technically the Com- mission has been in existence since 1965, it expired by law in 1967 and in 1969. The resultant need for reorganization and orientation of new members has reduced the Commission's actual working time to 3 years. Summarized in the following pages are highlights of the Commission's work over this period, its findings, problems im- plicit in the findings, .and current Commission projects to bring about solutiolis. Among findings are the following: .. The number of woman-he'aded families on welfare in Calif - ornia has nearly doubled in the last 2 years. In 1968 the number of such families was 158,000; in 1970 the number had increased to 296,000. - .. The number of divorces granted in California during the last decade has increased by 148%. From 1960 through 1970, 678,000 final decrees of divorce were granted, and 609, of the families involved had children under 18. .. More than 1 in 10 families in the nation is headed by a woman, and woman-headed families have increased by 24% during the last decade. Thirty-six percent -- numbering 1.8 million woman-headed families -- had incomes below the pwerty level in 1970. .. More than a million children in California need child care because their parents work, and the total capacity of licensed or supervised child care facilities, whether public or private, rofit or non-profit, will accommo- date only 125,000 c Eildren. .. The life expectancy, employment-life expectancy, marital, and childbearing pat terns of women have undergone dras tic change in recent decades, yet women and the society around them are enerally unaware of the changes and how to plan wiseI y to deal with them. .. Forty-two percent of ~alifornia'steen-age girls doubt their ability to be successful in chosen fields of work, and most do not see themselves as "achievers." .. Teen-age girls lack understanding of the need for re- training or education~asthey grow older. .. The overwhelming majority of California women workers are members of the workforce from economic necessity, and women workers tend to be concentrated in low-paying jobs. Not much imagination is needed to see the cause-and-effect relationship of these facts and conditions. Girls who do not see themselves as achievers don't get education or training for work with much economic potential. If they are divorced and have small children, lack of child care ata cost they can afford often places them in overty or on welfare. Because a working mother must care for Eome and children in the evening, added education for a higher-paying career is difficult if not impos- sible. Problems of older women cannot be separated from the aspirations and extent of education they had when they were girls. Each part of this picture relates to the others, and all . too often both women and society lose.

California Women Workers

At the turn of the century, women workers in California accounted for 13 percent of the workforce; in 1970, 3,000,000 California women worked outside the home and comprised wer 37 percent of the total workforce. The trend is not a temporary - phenomenon: between 1960 and 1970 their numbers increased by 55.5 percent (see Exhibits E and F, pages 61-62). To examine the facts and implications of women's employ- ment the Commission has studied a wide range of documents, held statewide public hearings, and conducted several special surveys which included personal interviews with line supervisors, in- dustrial training directors, management, women workers, and women seeking work. Why are so many women' emplo ed outside the home? The testimony and data are clear: t he overwhelming majority work from economic necessity. The latest figures available indicate that more than 1.25 million California women workers are either single, separated, divorced or widowed. Their need to work is obvious. Many married women face a similar economic imperative -- their husbands are either handicapped, irregularly employed, or employed at such low wages that the wife must work if the family is to survive. And the average California family has found in recent decades that the family cannot hope to buy a home, provide adequate family health care, pay their taxes, save for their children's college education and their own old age, and maintain a decent standard of living on a single salary.

Self-Image and Motivation

U. S. Department of Labor data reveal that more than half of today's girls will be full-time members of the workforce for up to 30 years and that 9 out of 10 will be employed for other significant periods. A statewide survey of teen-age girls was developed and conducted by the Commission in 1968 with the following purposes: .. to learn if girls are aware of these probabilities; .. to assess their view of present-day counseling and their future educational needs; .. to measure their basic self-image. A striking 42 percent doubted their ability to be successful, only a third planned on a college education, only 3 ercent saw any need for re-training or education later in t R eir lives, and few were interested in fields of work in which there is much economic potential. Two surveys conducted by the Commission in 1968 involving working women also revealed a repeated negative self-image. The need for positive self-image and self-confidence is obvious when viewed against a backdrop of the findings listed on pages 1 and 2. In 1969 the Commission recommended further study - about the genesis of negative self-image in girls. Well aware that multiple factors are involved, the Commission has examined several. Most recent is its review in 1970 of elementary and secondary textbooks used in California in which assessment was made of the part they lay in the developing self-concept of girls (see pages 39-40?. Convinced that a balance of adult role models throughout the educational system also affects self-image and aspirations of girls as they grow to adulthood, the Commission also in 1970 reviewed the proportion of men and women throughout the educa- tional system (see pages 41-42, and Exhibit H, pages 64-67).

Women' s Jobs and Earnings

Low self-image and low motivation combine to contribute significantly to the fact that women tend to be concentrated in low-paying jobs. Women in 1969 constituted more than two- thirds of all clerical workers, private household workers, waitresses and cooks. Nearly one-fifth of employed women with B.A. degrees have jobs in such categories as clerks and factory workers, while among the professions, women are only 1 percent of the nation's engineers, 3 percent of its lawyers, and 7 per- cent of its doctors. Data gathered by the Commission on women's earnings reflect a significant gap between male and female income, a gap which is widening (see Exhibit G, page 63). The median earnings of women workers in 1970 was 60 percent of the earnings of men, while in 1955 it was 64 percent. Another measure of the gap is distribution in earning categories. In 1968, 20 percent of the women but only 8 percent of the men earned less than $3,000; sixty percent of the women but only 20 percent of the men earned less than $5,000. At the upper end of the scale, qnly 3 ercent of the women but 28 percent of the men had earnings of $P 0,000 or more. Low earnings significantly affect the ability of women to afford needed services at private rates; low earnings often mean hardship for women and families; and low earnings often mean higher costs, borne by the taxpayer, for health and child care services; and once again the interrelationship of the findings is seen. Acknowledgement of the effect that lack of training and negative self-image may have on the position of women in the workforce does not detract from recognition that discrimination in employment has presented serious problems for women. In both 1967 and 1969 the Commission recommended legislation to prohibit such discrimination, and in 1970 such legislation became law in California.

Full-time Homemakers Another area involving the need for self-confidence, posi- I tive self-image, initiative, and useable skills involves the mature full-time homemaker who is suddenlywidowed or divorced, -- and the divorce rate for women over 40 has increased sharply in recent years. Women who have been outside the mainstream of economic life for many years are usually ill-equipped to meet the realities facing them. Skills are rusty and are often obsolete because of technological advance. The Commission has also given attention to the needs of other adult homemakers which arise from implications of women's increased life expectancy and changed marital and childbearing patterns. Women today live 25 years longer than they did at the turn of the century; half of today's women are married by the time they are 21; and the average mother has her last child when she is 30. When her youngest child enters school, today's mother has 40 years of life yet ahead. The challenge to women to use thosryears in fulfilling ways, and society's need for mature judgment and talent have never been greater. Needs of both groups of homemakers involve "re-direction counseling," testing, referral assistance, and often training or added education. A current Commission pilot project involves a community-based replicable program to meet these needs. The project involves newly-formed local volunteer coalitions of women (see page 9), local colleges, personnel agencies, business and industry, local offices of Human Resources Development, YWCA, and other helping groups. Earlier Commission work in this area included public hear- ings on existing resources available to adult women, a statewide survey of full-time homemakers, and recommendations for greater involvement by community colleges and expanded use by employers and colleges of the College Level Equivalency Examination, a series of tests which can significantly aid adult women with employment and education re-entry needs.

Tomorrow' s Women

The teen-age survey revealed that today's girls are unaware that, married or not, most of them will be employed for many years, that many will never marry, that many will be widowed for many years, that prhably 3 in 10 will be divorckd, that more than 1 in 10 will be the heads of families, that adequate and reliable child care at modest cost is in very short supply, and that if current childbearing trends continue, 40 potentially productive years of life will lie ahead after their youngest child is in school. In 1969 the Commission recommended that educational counsel- ing be made relevant to today's realities, and further recommended that a continuing Commission develop new educational tools to assist girls and schools. Its first step in implementing this recommendation involved meetinns with counselors. teachers and teen-age girls. Discussion wizh the girls produf ed ~enerally one of two reactions: I I It won't happen to me," or, since you can't control what ha~pensto you in life, why bother planning or worrying about it. It was also clear that the subject generally, and anything involving statistics was dull and un- interesting. Thus the task ahead was to discover how to capture girls' interest, increase their awareness, and produce motiva- tional change. Six months of planning resulted in a teen-age pilot project co-sponsored with the Women's Bureau of the U. S. Department of Labor and the Los An eles YNA. Components of the project were a multi-process fif m, simulated "life games," and live role models. The project was consciously designed to be ex- perimental to discwer what worked, what should be scrapped, and what would be valuable if modified. The project as a whole was highly successful and several of its units far exceeded hopes. The most successful of the units is an educational/motivational game with chance factors entitled "When I Grow Up I Want to Be Married." The game gives girls a greater awareness of the realities of women's lives; gives them experience and increased self-confidence in dealing with unexpected hardship and altered circumstances; and motivates girls to alter their current activities and plans to (a) avoid possible future pitfalls, and (b) maximize use of their abilities over the course of their lives. The Commission is currently finalizing work on a packet for schools which will incorporate the pilot project, a poster designed for girls, and various materials which will be directed to a variety of school personnel.

Girls From Poor Families

The fact that most women work from necessity, coupled with lack of early understanding of the need for education and train- ing, low self-image and low-motivation, and the concentration of women workers in jobs that are least rewarding financially add up to situations of real and often acute hardship when a irl or woman without job skills must support herself or her family . Undoubtedly, this constellation of factors, the rising divorce rate, and the lack of available child care facilities - have a direct impact on welfare rolls (see Exhibit A, page 57,). Another recent pilot project of the Commission involved teen-age girls from welfare and low income families as a spec cific population (the previously mentioned teen-age project was carefully designed to include a totally representative . cross-section). The proj ect' s goals were to improve con£ i - dence and self-image, to increase motivation, and to broaden horizons. Pre- and post-tests were-.used, and a follow-up check is planned to determine validity of the post-test results. Some of the questions and responses were: 1. Are you planning to finish high school? Pre-test: 40% were unsure. Post-test: 100% had decided that it was important to finish high school. 2. What do you plan to do after graduation? Pre-tes t: 100% answered "to get married." Post-test: 27% answered "go to junior college"; 27% said "get a job"; 46% said "be married." 3. Do you plan to continue your education after high school? Pre-test: 100% answered no. Post-test: 40.7% answered yes as follows: 272, junior college; 13%, business college; .07% trade school. 4. What would you do, if after you were married, your hus- band were injured or became ill and couldn't work, or if you became widowed? Pre-test : 100% answered "go on welfare ." Post-test: 53% said "get a job or continue working"; 47% said "go back to school," or "go back home until other plans could be made," etc.

Child Care Needs !

The importance of adequate and reliable child care has already been mentioned in connection with the ability of women to be employed. Commission findings show clearly that the biggest single problem of working mothers at all economic levels is adequate and reliable care for their children while they are on the job. The inevitable sum total of the increase in women workers, increase in women who are heads of families, increase in the divorce rate, increase in women who live in poverty, and : woman-headed families on welfare now being trained for the work- force, add up to a staggering increase in the need for child care facilities (see pages 2546). In 1968 the Commission met with various private groups and a variety of state and local wernment personnel involved with child care services; personalf y visited private profit day nurseries, private non-profit centers, licensed family day care homes, full-day Head Start Centers operated by Community Action Agencies, and State Children's Centers operated by local school districts; reviewed data involving federal rograms and funds; and held wide-ranging public hearin s for t R e purpose of develop- ing an overall statement of the chif d care picture, including the views and problems of parents. Full transcripts were one result, and the child care section of the Commission's 1969 report to the Legislature codified the results and put the overall statement into total perspec- tive. Both documents have been widely used by schools and colleges, private groups seeking solutions to child care needs, county welfare departments, and by a variety of personnel in both the legislative and executive branches of state government. Over the past year the Commission has concerned itself in part with potential industry participation in child care services. Except for two hospitals, no industry in California presently provides or participates in child care for its employees. The Commission has reviewed and supports the recent work of a special task force for industry participation conducted by the State Social Welfare Board, has examined industry centers on the east coast and the new center for employees of the U. S. Department of Labor, and has held preliminary discussion with several California employers: Local awareness of needs and willingness to participate in provision of services are essential if adequate solutions to child care needs are to be found. The Commission is currently tabulating, and will publish separately, results of a survey of California's 1200 local school districts. The purpose of the survey is to determine attitudes of school boards and school superintendents toward operation of Children's Centers and other child care programs; to determine whether increased interest in child care exists on the part of community groups, employers, developers or others; to discover which cities are attempting efforts at local coordination of resources; and to examine district$' attitudes and rograms relative to attracting new personnel to meet staff sK ortages, and training of personnel in the field.

The Commission has also rendered technical and consultive - assistance to many private entities throughout the state seeking private industry and private non-profit solutions, and is currently developing a packet for private and volunteer groups to assist in their search for solutions on a community level.

Local. Coalitions

s Over the course of its work during its 1967-1969 tenure, the Commission was assisted immeasurably by California's pres- tigious women's groups which have long-standing records of contribution and service to citizens and the state. Not satis- fied with merely uncovering new problems, they, like the Com- mission itself, saw the need to work together in new ways to help bring about solutions. In reviewing many of the needs uncovered it was seen that much could be done on a community level, and that local women have the capacity for special aware- ness of needs and potential solutions particular to their own community. Accordingly, one of the Commission's 1969 recommendations called for formation of local coalitions of women's groups to assist in solutions related to needs for re-direction counsel- ing, vocational and aptitude testing , employment, job training, child care, educational opportunities, volunteer opportunities and other concerns. It was recommended that local coalitions gather information on existing community resources which meet these needs, find effective ways to get the information to those who need it, and undertake activity to meet needs where inade- quate resources were found. Over the past 18 months the Commission has worked with women's groups at both the state and local level to implement this recommendation. In at least 20 California cities local coalitions are at work on a variety of projects, and many others are in the formation stage. A number of local coalitions have begun their work by gathering data and publishing directories on community resources needed particularly by women. Thousands of guides have been distributed by local coalition members in supermarkets, laundromats, libraries, etc., and also in local welfare and employment offices. Among many projects in operation or in the developmental stage are programs in the following areas: working with welfare and low-income families on menu-planning, food buying, and management of the household budget; tutoring and special help programs for girls who are school dropouts; establishment of a central helping and referral facility for adult women; educa- tion in government and the legislative process; increasing public awareness to stimulate greater 'participation by women in the life of communities ; establishment of a girl's club and recreational facilities for community teen-agers, to name only a few. - Throughout, the Commission has rendered consultive and technical assistance, but much remains to be done. The mture

Some of the changes in women's lives and the impact of those changes have created serious problems which are central to the society. At the same time, other changes in women's lives have freed many women to be a substantial part of the solution to problems of the society as a whole. The time is long past when the problems,and potential of women -- half our population -- can be considered peripheral. Consider again the interrelationship and implications of rising welfare rolls .. the accelerating divorce rate .. multi- plication of woman-headed families living in acute pwerty .. women concentrated in low-paying jobs .. lack of low-cost child care .. low self-image and low-motivation- of too many of today's girls .. lack of awareness of how to plan for and cope with change .. added years for potential contribution to society .. and consider again the oung woman quoted at the beginnin this Summary who said, feel I am mote aware of a woman f s role in the present and the future...I have more encouragement to go on." The Commission is due to expire in June, yet it sees a vital need for its work to continue. Its pilot projects under- taken in the last year have prwen that patterns can be changed. These proje,cts need expansion throughout the state. New pilot projects in areas yet untouched need to be devised and replicated. Since change is a constant factor, new research carried out by specialists in the field is needed. Greater public awareness of the impact of change is needed. Both government and private entities need a central source for information and consultive assistance. The newly formed and potential local coalitions need encouragement and consultive assistance if they are to survive and grow.

The Commission believes these are. - vital tasks and urges, among its other 1971 recommendations, that a continuing Commis- sion be enabled to undertake them. SUMMARY OF 197 1 RECOMMENDATIONS

PLANNING FOR THE mTTURE OF CHILD CARE SERVICES WITHIN THE STATE 1. That the needs of children and a concern for their posi- tive development be 'foremost in planning for and operation of child care senrices by both public and private bodies. 2. That with reeard to the advisory committee established through enacbent in 1970 of Assembly Bill 750 (Chapter 1619-70) : The committee be named Advisory Committee on Child Development since its concerns go beyond those of the preschool-age child and encompass full-day as well as part-day programs; - The Governor designate it to be a State 4-C Committee so that California can benefit from public and private re- sources working together to develop methods of cooperating with each other on programs, services, staff development and administrative activities; so that administrative re- lationships between local, state and federal entities can be simplified; and so that local public/private efforts to work together can be strengthened and more private involvement be encouraged; That it give high priority to formulation of a long-range plan for child care within the state which is not limited to programs supported with tax funds, but which also suggests methods for and encouragement of greater private sector involvement, and that its planning take into account population, workforce and manpower training trends as well as needs, problems, and public and private resources; Its mandate be broadened so that it can operate as a 4-C committee, and so that it can respond in its planning and advisory functions to changes in federal child care legis- lation and appropriations; That it study the feasibility of state novernment involve- ment in a lob-interest loan blan for co~struction,renwa- tion and preoperational costs for new centers, not limited to, but with the primary objective of encouraging greater participation in child care services by the private sector, industry and/or community groups; That one representative from each of the following entities - be added to the Committee: (1) A county welfare depart- ment. (2) A local school district which operates a children's Center program, (3) Industry, ind (4) The child development department of an institution of higher education so that future planning can inc lude expertise from the ievel where plans must be carried out and local administrative problems be thus avoided; and so that in- put is available from potential new participants in provi- sion of services and from those responsible for the train- ing of personnel for group child care programs; That funds be provided for a Committee staff and for nec- essary expenses of Committee members, so that the Committee is enabled to carry out its functions and duties. EXPANSION OF CHILD CARe SERVICES 1. That the State continue its support and the growth of the Children's Centers Program and other child care pro- grams so that needed services can be provided to greater numbers of children and their parents. 2. That particular effort be made to expand child care ser- vices to agricultural migratory workers, other seasonal workers, and the rural poor. 3. That California industry be encouraged to participate in the ~ndustry/ChildCare Pilot Program of the State Social Welfare Board, and continue to develop ways in which children, employees, and the economy can be better served through industry participation in child care services. PRIORITIES OF ELIGIBILITY FOR THE STATE CHILDREN'S CENTERS PROGRAM That priorities for Children's Centers eligibility be re- ordered to provide flexibility ensuring that a mixture of the eligible groups is possible in individual centers, so that social, economic and educational problems implicit in the isolation of children by socio-economic circumstance are not compounded, and so the positive benefits which are,derived from a sharing of diverse experience can be realized. STAFFING FOR CHILD CARE PROGRAMS

1. . That all entities planning for, regulating, or operating group child care services recognize that whoever -heads the center needs considerable expertise of an inter- disciplinary nature and is the person responsible .for training others on the staff, and that it is thus vital that heads of group facilities be professionally educated in child development so that they may train others.

2. That staff of local school districts which operate Chil- - dren's Centers or other full-day child care programs work with area colleges to expand educational programs for district child care staff, including workshops, on- going consultation, surmner sessions, in-service education, and programs for career advancement of aides and assistants. . That local school districts adopt policies and programs whereby district high school students can earn unit credit in planned programs which include observation and par- ticipation with children in child care programs of the district or in the community, and further, that districts help to facilitate the placement of a greater number of outside-work-experience students and Neighborhood Youth Corps students in child care programs. FAMILY DAY CARE HOMES That the Legislature and the State Department of Social Welfare request the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare to change the Federal Interagency Day Care Requirements to permit greater flexibility in the ages of children who may be cared for in a given family day care home, so that children who would be the logical clients of a given home by virtue of their proximity to it, or other reasonable circumstance, are not excluded solely because of their age, provided the home is other- wise deemed capable by the local licensing department of providing good care for its total client population. - 2. That needs of family day care parents to provide enrich- ment activities which contribute to the child's potential for learning and his or her emotional growth and develop- ment be met through expansion of formal and informal training opportunities using present county welfare department personnel and other caanrmnity resources. LICENSING OF FRANCHISED GROUP CHILD CARF: That the State Department of Social Welfare be supported in its olicy of issuance of licenses for franchised group care on tr, e basis of the individual center. VOCATIONAL READINESS OF GIRLS That the State Board of Education, the State Su erinten- dent of Public Instruction, the Chancellor of t K e Califor- nia Community Colleges, teacher and guidance and counsel- ing groups, teacher training institutions, and other groups interested in or affectin education work with the Com- mission to promote throug kout the educational system an awareness of the changing life patterns, changing oppor- tunities, and changing responsibilities for girls and women which achieves the goal of creating positive atti- tude and motivational change in students. Among other steps to be taken are: expanded use of the c om mission's new successful motivational tools; development of addi- tional tools; planning for more effective utilization of - vocational materials currently available; sponsorship of training programs for school and other relevant personnel in use of both old and new materials; and development of new delivery systems. 2. That career and vocational education and counseling be greatly expanded in elementary and secondary schools, and that schools give much greater encouragement to girls to undertake education and training that make the most of their potential and prepare them to meet responsibilities of the future. 3. That volunteer groups increase their efforts tlo assist and encourage girls who are school dropouts to complete.their education and training. TEXTBOOKS 1. That the State Curriculum Commission be instructed by the State Board of Education to include in the criteria state- ment developed for the evaluation and selection of text- books equal recognition of the achievements and contribu- tions of women. 2. That textbooks and teachin materials include portrayals of both men and women in a9 1 types of career roles, includ- ing professional, vocational, and executive roles, as well as decision-making roles in government. 3. That textbooks and teaching materials include information about the lives of great women as well as about the lives of great men. 4. That textbook publishing companies adopt policies and practices ensuring that their publications give fair, ade- quate and equal recognition to the contributions of both women and men, and that publications neither reflect adversely on either sex as a class, nor portray today's women or men in outmoded or stereotyped roles. BALANCE OF MEN AND WOMEN THROUGHOUT THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM 1. That administrators and boards of education in elementary, secondary, unified and community college districts, and relevant administrators in colleges and universities throughout the state,actively recruit and place in adminis- trative positions a greater number of qualified women. 2. That administrators and boards of school districts actively recruit and place a greater number of qualified men in teaching positions at the preschool, kindergarten and elementary level. -

3. ' That greater numbers of women qualified for administrative positions be encouraged to apply for such positions in California's schools, colleges and universities, and that greater numbers of men qualified to teach at the preschool, kindergarten and elementary level be encouraged to apply for such teaching positions. 4. That California colleges and universities which provide training in education administration encourage a greater number of their promising women students to prepare for administrative positions, and a greater number of their promisin men students to prepare for positions at the preschoo9 , kindergarten and elementary level; this en- couragement might be provided through scholarships and departmental policy, as well as through personal en- couragement by faculty. 5. That department chairmen and administrators of colleges and universities in California actively recruit, hire, and promote a greater number of qualified women to tenured positions, to associate professorships, and to full professorships. 6. That chairmen of dissertation committees take an active role in assistin in the placement of their women graduate students in teacf ing positions in higher education. 7. That greater numbers of qualified women be encouraged to run for office on boards of education in their community, whether for elementary, high school, unified, or community college districts. 8. That the Superintendent of public Instruction appoint qualified women to a reater number of administrative and policy-making pos !itions in the State Department of Education. 9. That greater numbers of qualified women be appointed to state level policy-making groups concerned with education, including the University of California Board of Regents, the California State Colleges Board of Trustees, the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, the State Scholarship and Loan Commission, and the Coordinating Council for Higher Education. 10. That all who influence, train, recruit, and place person- nel in positions in education strive for a balance of women and men at all levels in instruction, supervision, and administration. WOMEN AS PHYSICIANS That medical schools increase their efforts to recruit quali- fied women students, and that junior and senior high school and college counselors actively encourage more young women to consider medicine as a profession. COUNSELING AND REFERRAL NEEDS OF ADULTS That the local coalitions which have been formed throughout the state work with the Commission and with local offices of the State Department of Human Resources Development, local adult education programs, community colleges, employers, and others to offer special re-entry and mid-career programs and services for adults. PRIVATE GROUPS CONCERNED WITH EDUCATION That volunteer, service, and professional organizations and associations concerned with education work actively to achieve the educational goals contained in this Report. PROTECTIVE LABOR LAWS That review of protective labor laws continue. The Commission reiterates its ,1969 position that the health and well-being of workers in California, both men and women, should be adequately assured. A CONTINUING COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN That legislation be enacted to authorize and enable a continu- ing Commission on the Status of Women. BIBLIOGRAPHY OF AVAILABLE COMMISSION DOCUMENTS*

California Women, Report of the Advisory Commission on the Status of Women, May 1967' California Women, Report of the Advisory Commission on the Status of Women, May 1969

"Preliminary Report of the Teen-age Pilot Project ,I1 May 1970 "A Woman's Life" - pie chart, 1969 "The Need for Local Coalitions," 1970 "Lady, Do You Need Help," and "Lady, Do You Need a Career," exemplars of community resource directories, courtesy of the Sacramento Community Commission for Women, 1970 "What Will Future California Women Be Like," extract findings from the teen-age survey, 1969 "When I Grow Up I Want to be Married," simulated life game, 1970 "Public School Child Care Services Survey," 1971 Transcript of the Public Hearing on Day Care, 1968 Transcripts of Public Hearings on Private Employment held in Sacramento, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, 1966 Transcripts of Public Hearings on Educational Needs and Opportunities, held in San Francisco and Los Angeles, 1966 Proceedings of Conferences on Social Attitudes and Pressures, held in San Francisco and Los Angeles, 1966

* The Commission also has many other data and materials to which . interested persons can be referred. APPENDIX B from Skirting the CapitoZ, February 20, 1973

-3- , ...... : > . ... ;.-. ,...... LEGISIAT~ON'AFFECTING W~MEN. ...:...... ---. _: . I ...... : ...... -- -' .,...... _I : ...... ~'ia:.v&~krl$ in the session iid mini bills'iff~~tin~w6&n are being drafted r- but .o... $.:.far'.~'here . an a.few'of .interest: - ' - ;. -SB 38 - 'whetmore - pro&den that with respect to city councils any rcfercnce to 88cowcilman'ior "councilmen" shall also include ~'councilwomanwor l~~ouncilwomen. 5 Further provides that a female member of a city council may designate herself el~~un~il~~mam." (Has been referred to the Senate Local Government Committee chaired by senator MiltmMarka (R)of San ~rancio~o)

SB 98 - Dymally - thin year's version of the voter registration issue and women rcgistcring as Miss, Mrs. or Ms. (The best bill ever introduced on this issue was authored by Senator Alan Short. It passed the Legislature about five years ago, and provided that NO prefixes be required for anyone to registcr to votc. Each registrant would check one - Married, divorced, widowed or single! Pcriod. The bill was vctoed by the Governor) SB 98 has been referred to the Senate ~ornrniiteebn Elections and Rcapportionmcnt chaired by Senator Mervyn Dymally (D) of Los Angeles. -AB 10 - Leroy Greenc - Prohibits e,mployers from crediting employce tips and -gratuities against their wages. Tips would be the solc propcrty of the employ-; (Tell every waitress you know ;about this bill and how shc can support it by writing to her own Assemblyman!) The-bill has becn referred to thc Assembly Labor ~clatiorls Committee chaired by Lco McCarthy (D) of San Francisco.

AB 61 - Mc-4lister - H'ould eliminate a judge's required instructions to jurics in rape triaia which arc as follows: "A charge such as that madc against thc dzicndant in this case ,i one which is easily madc and, once i-nadc, diificult to dcirnd ag.~inst,e\vn if the person accused is innocent. Thcrclorc., thc la\\ rcquircs that sod esnnlinr thr testiqny of the female pcrson namrd in tllc information with cclution. '' To quote ials for other typcls of crinics no such illstructions arcb given trials." (Referred to Asscmbly Criminal Justicc Committee Bob Crown (D) of Oaklsnd.) STC is \\orking on a spccial thc near futurc.

AB 66 - Townsend - rr-quircfPvery public rcstroom "for wonlzn" to pro\.idc. tissuc or paper protection seat covers for toilet stalls. Rrtcrred to :\sscrnbly Con~tnittcron Health chaircd by Assemblyman Henry Waxman (D) of hs.4ngclcs. (hlr. Tc~~nscnd obviously had a lapse and will surely Tove to climinatc thc \\.ords "ior \vomcn."

AB Ll7 - Ingalls - provides nc\v designations fo.r n~cmbcrsof City Councils oi vcouncilwoman" or wcouncilpcrson. " (Similar to SB.38) Rt-fc*rrt-d tu =is scrnl,l!~ Local Government Committee chiiircd by John Knox (D)of ~i~~moiid.

AB LOO - ~eddtnh- Prqvidcs that-no admittcd insurcr shall rciuscn to insurt., ;or. cancel, nor isgue under conditions lcss favorablt* than those8 Ri\.a.~l'inother tomparablc casts, certain propcrty and liability insurancc to any pcrson by rtsason oi thc marital status, E, race, color, religion, national origin or anccstry oi suc.h pturson, nor shall any such factor of itscli constiiutt8 a condition or risk rcsultir~~in d higher ratc, premium or charge for uch insurance. .Also prohibits applikatio~liorms and insurancc investigation reports for\ uch insurance to rcquirc or carry thr. applicants marital status, sex. race, color, religion, national origin, or anccstry. Rt.it-rrcd to .lsst.n~hly Finance and Insurance Committec chairl'~dby Wadie Dvddch (D) oi Chul~Vist~. -. --a The anpiahed rcreunr of Xnrurmce Comp.Oier cm hhmrt be heard vherersr you are AS 250 - Cline - Provider for ktionof riagle persona the rrme ar married persons -filin8 jotat returhs. According to Mt. Cline #@wemuat take rtepa terrrrd wktifyfng. the di~criminationwhich has existed tor quite a few year8 in the tax law. I ree no reamon why ringb people should pay SO to 2500 percent more than married tcmple8 with comparable incomes even though married couples may have no children aad only one wage earner. " Aaaemblyrrun Uiae point. out, "Married couplea with a trubl income of $7,000 an rhaps owone wage earner md no children pay $50 in 8tate income tax, wherean% 8 e individurla with the aame income pay $155 -300 percent .higher. . . My lagirlation would extend the concept of income splitting to iinOle . perronr a8 it currently exirts for married couplea. " Referred to Asrsmbly Reverne . and Taamtion Committee chaired by Asaernblymm Joe Gonsalvea (D) Norwalk. AB 282 - Cling - wd'allow married women to open aecurity brqkerr1 accounts ,without their humbandr' consent.. Oa thia one, Mr. Cline aaya, "The re is 8 widcapread ' practice which requires a aecurity broker tohave the huabandn8 consent before hir wife can open Q recurities account. This is true even if the woman has aeparate property La her own name acquired through inheritance or a gift." Referred to the Asrembly Judiciary Committee chaired by Assemblyman Charlea Warren (DFW Lor ADgele a. . AB 312 - Waxman and Berman - Prohibit8 denial of credit to women under derignated condition8 and require8 credit reporting agencier upon requeat of a married woman to maintain credit file. in her name. Provider civil remedier for violation of much provirion. Referred to Aasembly Judiciary Committee.

Some community property management billn are raid to be in the draft atage. Women's group8 are encouraged to rtart learning the difference betyeen "joint management^ and "partnerrhipa" -- invite local attorneys to educate you. Husband8 preoently have .ole control and management of community property! This is irreconcilable with

the ERA and with any conception of fairne'rr. But the answer is not going to be an ' . eaay one. More on this, 'too, as the year develops..

FEMININITY RE-DEFINED!

- -The Feminist Eng;lirh Dictionar~ir in the works -- ~ditor,Ruth Taylor Todasco, Ph.D. at Loop Center YWCA, 37 So. Wabash Ave. Chicago, Ill. 60603. According to Dr. Todasco, "With Webster as a guide, a child in linguistically structured into prejudice. .In Webrter88 Third New International Dictionary 1966, there are 87 lines devoted to the definition8 of man . . .28 lines for the definitions of woman. Her nature? 'One ponne8sing in high degree the qualitie8 distinctive of ~omanh~od'(~entAencss,affection, and domerticity or on -the other hand fickleness, superficiality and folly). The parallel definition of man's nature is: 'One possessing in high degree the qualities connidered diotinctive of manhood (courage, etrength and vigor). WhyH, asks Dr. Todarco, "8uch a distinction?" "Women can he courageous, men can be gentle, and all human beings capable of folly. l1 She asks for aqsistance in her research of the hngqge to discover the 'evidcn~e-ofprejudice: notation8 of words, definitions, illurtrationm which are prejudicial; reviews of words which ruggeet diecrimination; freahly written entrier from a womanly point of view, etc. t A one-year subscription to SKIRTING THE CAPITOL is yours for $15.00. Send check or money order.to P. 0. ..Box 4569, Sacramento, Ca. 95825. APPENDIX C

.. Newrletter about Legislation and Women / / ..T , VOLUME' VII ":. MAY 14,. 1973 ' .- : , ...... NUMBER 6 P. 0. Box 4569 Sacramento, California 95825 Telephone 916 481-2417

...... -.... 1. . To ate, nearly 4.0.00-bill. and resolutions have deen introducedlin the California Legis- lature -- and we have just paaaed the four-month mark id a two-year rersion! Skirting . -the Capitol has founds bills and resolutions of general interest to women or affecting the status of women directly. Of these, two bills have already been signed into law by the Governor and two resolutions have passed both Houses of the Legimlature (they & not require the Governorts signature. ) One bill has been amended to ,delete the portion of interest to women.

Of the remaining 44 bills thus far iotroduced 5 deal with abortion, 5 with pregnancy, 3 with taration, 16with assorted kinds of sex discrimination, and 2 are attempts to rescind California's ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. There has been no discernible serious, comprehensive, acceptable effort to bring about conformity in California law with the Equal Rights Amendment, which is disturbing. We are being deluged with bills

which could aoon become a sea in which we will flounder 0- some very good ones, some terrible one8 -- all chipping away here and there at the problems but never coming to grips with the total picture and how it can best be resolved.

STC considers 31 bills worth supporting (many of them conflict with each other or are identical to each other) -- 3 worth seriously opposing, 1 worth watching and studying, and10 not worth taking any position on whatever. This newsletter's recommendations are indicated in the following manner: S means Support, 0 means Oppose, NP means STC . . - - has No Position on the measure, -WW meane Worth. ~aGhing. AB 6 - Cline - Would redu'ce the personal state income tax on inmarried heads-of-house- ISwidows,divorcees, etc.) For person's earning $8,000 or less a year, the reduction would bring- tax to level now allowed married persons with comparable in-.For. person's rarningabove$8,000 there .would .he a .graduated reductia-n- - ; from the present tax rate. (Seventy-five .percent of all unmarried heads-of- - household earn $8,000 or less.) --- Has passed the Assembly and passed the senate Revenue & Taxation Committee on May 9th. ---It is now facing the- Senate Finance Committee. No date has been set for a hearing.

AB 10 - Leroy F. Greene - Would prohibit employers from crediting tips and gratuities S J given to an employee against wages. --- Has passed the Assembly and will be heard by the Senate Industrial Relations Committee this week.

AB 61 - McAlister - Requires that in any progecution for various sex crimes (including [ NP 1 rape) the court shall no longer give an instruction to the jury to the effect that ruch cb;rger aie ecrily made, difficdt to defend. against, d &t th= te8-G. of the fbmale dctiin be viewed with caution. --- .This bfu ia hib~&~rbl Crimiaal Jlortice Committee where it will probrbly ikybecaure such &rget ARE easily mde and AR& difficult to defrnd against I - T. - . - -. 4 -. .. . . , r' - AB'EOO- D&eh - Prohibits dias;im&uation 16 the i;*&t& of propex&'md-- -._lhbility 1 XP I inmuranee on the basis bf race, Color, religion, Oatio~lorigin or anceatq. This '-at bill is of iaterest dy'be~aure,-in its original form - before it wam Amended on . March 12th. it also prohibited discrimination because of marital rtahu--- or .ex. --- Once there words were dropped the bill parsed the Assembly Finance & Lnsurance Committee, the'A mbly Floor, and is now &XI the Senate Xnsurance & Ftoancial hstitutions Corn!&. St is now, of courre, not a mtatur of women biU. . . -- AB 250 - Cline - me "single person's Tax Billn would provide for taxation of mingle 1 S '1 persona oa the rame basis as married persons filing joint returns. ---.Set for public hearing by a sub-committee of the Asrembly Revenue & Taxation Committee J on Wednesdtiy? May 23rd, at 4:30 p.m. in Room 6017. Tq ereas your views, write to Asremblymen Consalves (Chairman),-- Bagley, Cory, KapLloff, and Murphy. *AB282 - Cline - Would give married women the right to buy and .ell securitier in their own name without their husband'r conrent. According to one legal expert in the .# ; Capitol thir-would pose problem8 for securities brokers since it fly. ink face of *' . . exirting community property laws. --- Taken under-l'submission'f by the Asaembly - Judiciary Committee. (See SB 397)

AB 312 - Waxman - Provider that a married woman shall not be denied credit in her own 1 S I name if her earnings or separate property are such that a man possessing the same amount of property or earnings .would receive credit. Also provide6 that - unmarried women rhall not be denied credit on the rame basis. Interestingly, the same arguments could be made against this bill as were made against AB 282, but this bill ir given a chance of passage because of greater "publicity and support. " Much mail is being received by Assemblymen in support of this meabure. if enough mail im received, it may pass. Set for hearing in Assembly Judiciary Committee on Tuerday, May 15th, at --1:45 p.m. in --Room 6028.

AB 362 - Wannan .a Creates a California Fair Campaign Practices Commission and would, I NP I among other things, prohibit the use of campaign material of any kind which appeals to prejudice based on race, creed, -sex, or national origin. --- Ln Assembly Elections -and Reapportionment Committee. Not yet set for hearing. AB 387 - Moretti - Appropriates $8,806,500 to replace the loss of certain federal social aervice funds for child care in the 1972-73 fiscal year. Threatened federal cut- . backs would lock 30,000 children out of their child care centers. Assembly - - - .. - . -. . Speaker303' Mor-e€tifritr'oducid'thi* emergency measure to insure-their-contirmaticm- if the cut8 took place. The bill passed both Houses of the Legislature without a single negative vote and was signed int~law by the Governor. (See AB 1244) -- 6 SB 395 - Would extend eligibaity for unemployment compensation benefits to individuals who terminate their employment in order to accompany spouse to a . . 4 place from which it is impractical to commute or whose marital or domestic d2ties cause -him or -her to resfgn from -his or -her employment! --- The bill is in the Assembly Finance -& Insurance Committee and not yet set for hearing.

-. #