Transcribe
Translate
NAACP newsletters, Fort Madison Branch, Fort Madison, Iowa, 1968
Page 002
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
-2- The 1968 Civil Rights Bill finally got past the Senate, but with no thanks to Senators Hickenlooper and Miller from Iowa. Now, is the time to get busy and WRITE!!! WRITE!!! WRITE!!! To Your Representatives urging them to vote for passage of the Bill. 1st District Residents write to: Representative Fred Schwengel House Office Building Washington, D.C. The passage of legislation on Housing on the Federal level, does not mean that an ordinance on Open Housing should not be passed on the State and local levels. Law is only a promise...and this has been proven as far as minorities are conerned, throughout the years. Fulfillment of the promise comes only with enforcement. In the first place, and we have used it several times in our Newsletter, the 1866 Federal Civil Rights Act is still on the books, in other words it has not been repealed. It states,..."All citizens of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory, as is enjoyed by white citizens thereof to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold and convey real and personal property." This, in itself only proves that without enforcement on any level, a law is only so many words on a piece of paper. Iowa has always professed to be one of the more liberal of the states,...and, indeed, they have been, in the passage of civil rights legislation. However, in living up to the legislation, citizens around the state have proven many times that they are no different from the American majority, anywhere. It is unfortunate when any man, regardless of his race, color or creed must seek help from the court to get something which should be rightfully his as a citizen of a country. It has long been the opinion of the Fort Madison, NAACP, that an Open Housing Ordinance was needed, here. The passage of such an ordinance is desirable, for many reasons, but in particular, it would prove that this is a 'forward - moving' community. Fort Madison does not stand alone, that is, we are not without our problems in the area of inter-group relations. Refusing to admit they do exist, will not make them go away! "Opposition of the real estate industry and of some homeowners to the fair housing legislation is now based almost exclusively on the proposition that government regulation of private property is wrong - that such legislation is an invasion of "sacred" property rights. If this argument were accepted by government and the courts, there would be no zoning regulations, no fire and sanitary requirements, and no building construction codes. The highest court in Massachusetts, in a 1962 decision upholding the constitutionality of that state's fair housing law, had this to say:"...neither property rights nor contract rights are absolute; for the government cannot exist if the citizen may at will use his property to the detriment of his fellows, or exercise his freedom of contract to work them harm. Equally fundamental with the private right is that of the public to regulate it in the common interest. (Massachusetts Commission v. Colangel, 182 N.E. 2d 595) Courts in other states have expressed similar opinions on the subject of property rights vs. human rights. Child labor laws, minimum wage laws, stock registration and control laws, the first tenement house laws, as well as civil rights laws in the fields of public accommodations and employment all gave rise to charges that government was violating private rights. Would any responsible citizen oppose these laws today?" -taken from Fair Housing Handbook page 31 University of Iowa Libraries, Iowa Women's Archives
Saving...
prev
next
-2- The 1968 Civil Rights Bill finally got past the Senate, but with no thanks to Senators Hickenlooper and Miller from Iowa. Now, is the time to get busy and WRITE!!! WRITE!!! WRITE!!! To Your Representatives urging them to vote for passage of the Bill. 1st District Residents write to: Representative Fred Schwengel House Office Building Washington, D.C. The passage of legislation on Housing on the Federal level, does not mean that an ordinance on Open Housing should not be passed on the State and local levels. Law is only a promise...and this has been proven as far as minorities are conerned, throughout the years. Fulfillment of the promise comes only with enforcement. In the first place, and we have used it several times in our Newsletter, the 1866 Federal Civil Rights Act is still on the books, in other words it has not been repealed. It states,..."All citizens of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory, as is enjoyed by white citizens thereof to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold and convey real and personal property." This, in itself only proves that without enforcement on any level, a law is only so many words on a piece of paper. Iowa has always professed to be one of the more liberal of the states,...and, indeed, they have been, in the passage of civil rights legislation. However, in living up to the legislation, citizens around the state have proven many times that they are no different from the American majority, anywhere. It is unfortunate when any man, regardless of his race, color or creed must seek help from the court to get something which should be rightfully his as a citizen of a country. It has long been the opinion of the Fort Madison, NAACP, that an Open Housing Ordinance was needed, here. The passage of such an ordinance is desirable, for many reasons, but in particular, it would prove that this is a 'forward - moving' community. Fort Madison does not stand alone, that is, we are not without our problems in the area of inter-group relations. Refusing to admit they do exist, will not make them go away! "Opposition of the real estate industry and of some homeowners to the fair housing legislation is now based almost exclusively on the proposition that government regulation of private property is wrong - that such legislation is an invasion of "sacred" property rights. If this argument were accepted by government and the courts, there would be no zoning regulations, no fire and sanitary requirements, and no building construction codes. The highest court in Massachusetts, in a 1962 decision upholding the constitutionality of that state's fair housing law, had this to say:"...neither property rights nor contract rights are absolute; for the government cannot exist if the citizen may at will use his property to the detriment of his fellows, or exercise his freedom of contract to work them harm. Equally fundamental with the private right is that of the public to regulate it in the common interest. (Massachusetts Commission v. Colangel, 182 N.E. 2d 595) Courts in other states have expressed similar opinions on the subject of property rights vs. human rights. Child labor laws, minimum wage laws, stock registration and control laws, the first tenement house laws, as well as civil rights laws in the fields of public accommodations and employment all gave rise to charges that government was violating private rights. Would any responsible citizen oppose these laws today?" -taken from Fair Housing Handbook page 31 University of Iowa Libraries, Iowa Women's Archives
Campus Culture
sidebar
