Reminder

The legislative agendas of African-American Members in the post-1970 era reflected the diversity of their committee assignments and the range of interests within the general membership of Congress. Most sought to advance a broad progressive legislative agenda supported by advocacy groups such as the National Urban League and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)—extending voting rights protections, improving educational and economic opportunities, fostering urban renewal, and providing access to better health care. Increasingly, African American Members were emboldened to pursue legislative agendas that reflected the unique needs of their constituencies or their personal positions on issues.

Voting Rights

View larger image courtesy of the Library of Congress enacted legislation in 1983 to commemorate the birth date of Martin Luther King, Jr., as a national holiday—marking a major legislative triumph for the CBC.

This hand bill, noting the anniversary of King’s 1968 assassination, sought to rally public support for the creation of the holiday.Extensions of civil rights era voting protections were a touchstone for African-American Members of Congress. Efforts to retain and expand upon the provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965—which Barbara Jordan once referred to as the “frontispiece” of the civil rights movement—provided continuity between Members of the civil rights generation and their successors in the post-1970 generation of African Americans in Congress. Two extensions were of particular importance: the Voting Rights Acts of 1975 and 1982.

The Voting Rights Act of 1975 strengthened the provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (as well as its 1970 extension).⁷² The House passed the act on June 4, 1975, by a vote of 341 to 70. After Senate passage, and after the House accepted some Senate amendments, President Gerald R. Ford signed the measure into law on August 6, 1975—the 10th anniversary of the original landmark bill. As with earlier acts, jurisdictions covered by the 1975 extension had to submit to the U.S. Attorney General any changes in local and state election law for “preclearance” in which federal authorities determined whether the proposed modification to the law had discriminatory intent. The 1975 act also increased jurisdictions covered by the act to include locations in the North and West. Moreover, it applied not just to African Americans, but also “language minorities,” including Spanish speakers, Native Americans, and Asian Americans. It required bilingual elections in areas where there were large numbers of voters whose English literacy was below the national average.⁷³View Larger Image courtesy of Moorland–Spingarn Research Center, Howard University As leaders in Congress, Barbara Jordan of Texas (left foreground) and Ronald Dellums of California (center background) sought to build coalitions inside and outside of the Congressional Black Caucus.African-American Members played a prominent part in this debate. “The voting rights act may have overcome blatant discriminatory practices,” noted Barbara Jordan, testifying before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Constitutional Rights. But she added, “it has yet to overcome subtle discriminatory practices.” Charles Rangel agreed that the protections were needed. “Malevolent local government must not be exposed to any temptation to take back the political rights and powers that have so recently come to southern blacks,” Rangel said.⁷⁴Andrew Young pointed to vastly improved registration numbers in the seven southern states covered by the original 1965 act (29 percent registered in 1964 had expanded to 56 percent in 1972) as well as in the number of elected black officials in the South (72 in 1965 compared with 1,587 in 1975). “The remarkable effect of this act is that it has a preventative effect,” Young observed. “There are some reports that the threat of suing examiners has a deterrent effect—that local registrars began to register black voters so that federal examiners would be kept out.”⁷⁵

The 1982 Voting Rights Act extension provided another victory for the civil rights movement and also paved the way for the expansion of African-American representation in Congress in the 1990s.⁷⁶ During floor debate—prior to overwhelming passage by the House—a number of black Members of Congress spoke on behalf of the bill. Representative Bill Clay Sr. cast the debate in broad terms: “Are we willing to continue our forward momentum in America’s bold and noble attempt to achieve a free and just democratic society? Or, will we embrace the politics of reversal and retreat; the super rich against the wretchedly poor, the tremendously strong against the miserably weak?”⁷⁷

The bill extended the act’s major provisions for 25 years. It also established a procedure by which jurisdictions that maintained a clean voting rights record for at least a decade could petition a panel of judges to be removed from the preclearance list. The bilingual election materials requirements established in the 1975 act were also enacted for another decade. Mickey Leland, who succeeded Representative Jordan in her Houston-centered district, addressed the House in Spanish to make a point about the need for extending those provisions. “Many of you cannot understand me,” Leland said in Spanish, “and if you cannot understand me . . . nor can you understand 17 percent of all the adult workers in the Southwest. . . . And even though you cannot understand me when I speak Spanish maybe you can begin to understand the hypocrisy of our political system which excludes the participation of Hispanic-Americans only for having a different culture and speaking a different language.”⁷⁸

Most significant, the Voting Rights Act of 1982 established that certain voting rights violations could be proven to be the result of voting modifications, even if intent could not be established. That section of the bill overturned a 1980 Supreme Court decision in Mobile v. Bolden that found a violation could be proven only if the intent to discriminate could be substantiated. This legislative instrument provided the basis for the creation of majority-black districts following the 1990 Census, particularly in southern states.⁷⁹

In 2006 the Voting Rights Act was once again extended for 25 years.⁸⁰ Many Republicans opposed the extension and emphasized that the districts which were required to meet the preclearance standards of Section 5 were being perpetually punished for voter repression that occurred in the past. They also objected to the bilingual voter assistance provisions of the law.⁸¹ As a compromise with the bill’s most fervent opponents, House Republican leadership allowed four amendments to reach the floor that might kill the measure, but all of the amendments were rejected, and the law preserved the preclearance provision in Section 5 and mandated the printing of bilingual ballots.⁸²

Despite the 2006 extension, opponents of the Voting Rights Act continued to challenge parts of the law, only this time in the courts. In Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court ruled in 2013 that the coverage formula in Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, which determined which counties would be subjected to federal preclearance, was unconstitutional. Citing methodological deficiencies in establishing the coverage formula, the 5–4 majority rendered the preclearance provisions inoperative.⁸³

history.house.gov

In August 1833, the Slave Emancipation Act was passed, giving all slaves in theBritish empire their freedom, albeit after a set period of years. Plantation owners received compensation for the ‘loss of their slaves‘ in the form of a government grant set at £20,000,000.

Campaigning for Freedom With the passing of the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act by the British Parliament in 1807, the attention of campaigners against the slave trade switched to slavery itself. For although the slave trade had been banned, nothing had been done to free the existing enslaved workforce in the British empire. In 1823 religious groups, politicians and supporters from around the country came together to form the Anti-Slavery Society. Women’s Anti-Slavery Associations During the 1820s and early 1830s, a strong network of women’s anti-slavery associations developed. The Birmingham Society played a particularly active role in helping to promote and establish local groups in many parts of Britain. Influenced by the Birmingham Society, over 73 women’s associations were founded between 1825 and 1833, which supplied a constant stream of information to rouse public opinion against slavery.

Birmingham’s Emancipation Movement Document | Transcript

In the anti-slavery movement, women found a basis from which they could pursue their own liberation. They were able to use the terminology of the anti-slavery campaign as a way to articulate some of the inequalities they suffered; and the anti-slavery campaign in many ways set the scene for the women’s rights movement. One way in which enslaved Black women in Britain fought against their status was by running away. One such woman was Mary Prince, a Bermudan who escaped from her owners shortly after her arrival in London in 1828. Although very particular about the enslaved women it chose to support, the Abolition Society was instrumental in the writing and publishing of Prince’s narrative The History of Mary Prince, a West Indian Slave. Related by Herself. This text, which was one of many used by the abolitionists to further their campaign, was in fact the first slave narrative by a woman from the British Caribbean. The preface to it states that the ‘idea of writing Mary Prince’s history was first suggested by herself. She wished it to be done, she said, that good people in England might hear from a slave what a slave had felt and suffered.’ Poignantly, Mary Prince describes her purpose in making her experiences public, despite the painfulness of recalling and articulating her suffering: Oh the horrors of slavery! – How the thought of it pains my heart! But the truth ought to be told of it; and what my eyes have seen I think it is my duty to relate; for few people in England know what slavery is. I have been a slave – I have felt what a slave feels, and I know what a slave knows; and I would have all the good people in England to know it too, that they may break our chains, and set us free.

The Road to Emancipation By 1824 there were more than 200 branches of the Anti-Slavery Society in Britain – an indicator of increasing support for the fight against slavery. The campaign was one of many taking place, for this was a period of great economic and social change both in Britain and in the British colonies. It was increasingly evident that the plantation system in the British Caribbean was in need of reform and transformation. Factory owners in England were being forced to consider the rights and needs of workers; and with shifts in international borders and trade, British planters were facing new forms of competition in a changing world market. Moreover, deprived of their cargoes of enslaved men and women, British ships now crossed the Atlantic fully laden – with raw materials such as cotton and sugar – on the return journey only. Thus, the abolition of slavery in Britain was waged in a society already in a state of economic, political and social flux. As C. L. R. James was to later argue, the abolition of slavery was to be an integral part of the development of modern British society.

Rebellion and Retaliation While William Wilberforce, Lord Brougham and others pushed the debate forward in Parliament, enslaved people in the Caribbean continued to fight individually, as well as collectively, against slavery. As the reporting of the campaign gained momentum in the press – both in Britain and throughout the British Caribbean – rebellions and resistance increased. For example, in 1823 in Demerara, in British Guiana, over 13,000 slaves joined a rebellion because they felt that the local plantation owners had refused to obey British orders to free them. Planters in the Caribbean and their supporters and pro-slavery representatives in the British Parliament continued to argue for slavery. From time to time this opposition erupted into violence, and in some cases missionaries in the West Indies who were in favour of emancipation found their churches burned by aggrieved planters.

Emancipation Achieved In the 1830s, a number of Acts were passed that fundamentally changed British society and the lives of millions of people living in British colonies. The Reform Act of 1832 brought an end to the old system whereby most MPs were allowed to buy their seats in Parliament. The new Parliament of 1833 included men (women were not as yet allowed to become MPs) who were connected with the new textile industries based in Britain. In August 1833, the Slave Emancipation Act was passed, giving all slaves in the British empire their freedom, albeit after a set period of years. Plantation owners received compensation for the ‘loss of their slaves’ in the form of a government grant set at £20,000,000. In contrast, enslaved people received no compensation and continued to face much hardship. They remained landless, and the wages offered on the plantations after emancipation were extremely low. The 1833 Act did not come into force until 1 August 1834. The first step was the freeing of all children under six. However, although the many thousands of enslaved people in the British West Indies were no longer legally slaves after 1 August 1834, they were still made to work as unpaid apprentices for their former masters. These masters continued to ill-treat and exploit them. Enslaved people in the British Caribbean finally gained their freedom at midnight on 31 July 1838.

Planters’ Insatiable Appetite for Slave Labour Document | Transcript

References and Further Reading Clarkson, T., History of the Rise, Progress and Accomplishment of the Abolition of the African Slave Trade by the British Parliament, London, 1808 Gratus, J., The Great White Lie: Slavery, Emancipation and Changing Racial Attitudes, London, 1973 Edwards, P. and Rewt, P., The Letters of Ignatius Sancho, Edinburgh,1994 Midgley, C., Women Against Slavery: The British Campaigns 1780-1870, London and New York, 1992 Myers, N., Reconstructing the Black Past, London, 1996 Prince, Mary, The History of Mary Prince. A West Indian Slave, Related by Herself , Michigan,1993 Walvin, J., An African’s Life: The Life and times of Olaudah Equiano 1745-1797, London, 1998 Williams, E., Capitalism and Slavery, 1994 Wilson, E. G., Thomas Clarkson: A Biography, London, 1989 For the text of Mary Prince’s The History of Mary Prince, a West Indian Slave. Related by Herself, see: http://docsouth.unc.edu/neh/prince/prince.html For more about the Reform Act of 1832, see: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/struggle_democracy/getting_vote.htm

a repost

For the complete article

blackthen.com

Jeanne Theoharis

(WOMENSENEWS)–Rosa Parks‘ most historic hour may have occurred on the bus in December 1955 but a moment that perhaps revealed more of her strength of character came 40 years later.

On Aug. 30, 1994, at the age of 81, Parks was mugged in her own home by a young black man, Joseph Skipper. Skipper broke down her back door and then claimed he had chased away an intruder. He asked for a tip. When Parks went upstairs to get her pocketbook, he followed her. She gave him the $3 he initially asked for, but he demanded more. When she refused, he proceeded to hit her.

“I tried to defend myself and grabbed his shirt,” she explained. “Even at 81 years of age, I felt it was my right to defend myself.”

He hit her again, punching her in the face and shaking her hard, and threatened to hurt her further. She relented and gave him all her money–$103. Hurt and badly shaken, she called Elaine Steele who lived across the street and had become a key source of support. Steele called the police who took 50 minutes to arrive. Meanwhile, the word went out that someone had mugged Parks.

For the complete article

womensnews.org

Most Caribbean countries remained under colonial rule after the abolition of slavery. Between 1958 and 1962 most of the British-controlled Caribbean was integrated as the new West Indies Federation in an attempt to create a single unified future independent state. The West Indies Federation fell apart when the largest island Jamaica withdrew from the federation and declared itself independent in August 1962 followed by Trinidad and Tobago in August 1962.

 

Road to Independence

Most Caribbean countries remained under colonial rule after the abolition of slavery. Between 1958 and 1962 most of the British-controlled Caribbean was integrated as the new West Indies Federation in an attempt to create a single unified future independent state.

The West Indies Federation fell apart when the largest island Jamaica withdrew from the federation and declared itself independent in August 1962 followed by Trinidad and Tobago in August 1962. By the end of the 1960s, only few Caribbean islands remained dependent territories. Barbados gained its independence in 1966; the Bahamas in 1973; Grenada in 1974; Dominica in 1978; St. Lucia and St. Vincent and the Grenadines in 1979; Antigua and Barbuda in 1981; and St. Kitts and Nevis in 1983.

Currently, Montserrat, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, and the Turks and Caicos Islands remained crown colonies with limited internal self-government. Anguilla, having broken away unilaterally from St. Kitts-Nevis in 1967, became an Associated State of Great Britain in 1976.