Rand Paul and the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Over a 19-minute interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on Wednesday, U.S. Senate nominee Rand Paul of Kentucky – the new hero of tea party activists and many in the GOP — could not answer one specific question:
Does he agree with the portion of the 1964 Civil Rights Act that bars private businesses from discriminating against people because of the color of their skin?
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
“I don’t believe in any racism. I don’t believe we should have any government racism, any institutional form of racism,” Paul said. He declared the abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison the be one of his “favorite historical characters.”
He called the South’s attachment to Jim Crow “a stain on the history of America.” He said that the federal government had a right to go after “institutional racism.”
But Paul could not bring himself to say that the federal government had the power to use the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution to force a restaurant to serve black customers. Think Lester Maddox and his Pickrick restaurant in Atlanta, waving his pick handle and handgun.
This is what makes many Republicans nervous.
Paul called the question an “abstract, obscure discussion from 1964,” but eventually drew a comparison with the right to carry a firearm:
“If you decide that restaurants are publicly owned and not privately owned, then do you say that you should have the right to bring your gun into a restaurant even though the owner of the restaurant says, ‘Well no, we don’t want to have guns in here,’ the bar says, ‘We don’t want to have guns in here because people might drink and start fighting and shoot each-other.’ Does the owner of the restaurant own his restaurant? Or does the government own his restaurant?”
Democrats immediately jumped on the evasion, and this morning, the Paul campaign posted the following “in response to liberal media attacks” on its Web site:
“I believe we should work to end all racism in American society and staunchly defend the inherent rights of every person. I have clearly stated in prior interviews that I abhor racial discrimination and would have worked to end segregation.
Even though this matter was settled when I was 2, and no serious people are seeking to revisit it except to score cheap political points, I unequivocally state that I will not support any efforts to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
“Let me be clear: I support the Civil Rights Act because I overwhelmingly agree with the intent of the legislation, which was to stop discrimination in the public sphere and halt the abhorrent practice of segregation and Jim Crow laws.
“As I have said in previous statements, sections of the Civil Rights Act were debated on Constitutional grounds when the legislation was passed. Those issues have been settled by federal courts in the intervening years.
“My opponent’s statement on MSNBC Wednesday that I favor repeal of the Civil Rights Act was irresponsible and knowingly false. I hope he will correct the record and retract his claims.”
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
105 comments Add your comment
Jason
May 20th, 2010
11:54 am
And he’s 100% correct
Gaty
May 20th, 2010
11:59 am
The tea part wants to take the country back. Back to the 1800s.
Jumbo G is the king of conventional thinking
May 20th, 2010
12:01 pm
And thus the libs and media wh@res think they have a way to topple the Tea Party. The problem that you media wh@res and other leftists have is that you play the race card all the time. This will not work. But ya’ll feel free to do reports and write articles for each other to read. We are taking this country back and there is NOTHING you libs can do about it. Hugs!
Kevin O'Keefe
May 20th, 2010
12:01 pm
Watched the interview in its entirety. Paul is right. The Civil Rights Act casts too wide a net. Also, segregation among minorities regarding scholarships, affirmative action, grants, housing appropriations and residential loans, business loans and even beauty contestsa continue to be segregated towards minorities. So equality doesn’t really exist and I would argue anyone to say it does. CRA has been a tool to segregate and not to desegregate and history will prove this as fact.
bspsr
May 20th, 2010
12:02 pm
Mr. Paul was asked the same question earlier on NPR. He repeated several times “I am against racism”, and “I abhor racism”. Mr. Paul also added that he had never read the 1964 Civil Rights bill(s), so, could not intelligently comment. It is obvious that the liberal media is making a witch hunt out of this issue. Mr. Paul is dancing around this issue because the Civil Rights bills did Federally what should have been done on the state level (it is a shame that this was not possible in the 60s south because of systemic racism in southern state governments). Mr. Paul is for less government. What is wrong with that?
Real America
May 20th, 2010
12:05 pm
The tea-b@ggers are who we thought they were.
Jean Shonay
May 20th, 2010
12:06 pm
I think he may have just lost himself the election in November.
Jumbo G is the king of conventional thinking
May 20th, 2010
12:07 pm
Someone should ask that maddow fella if he has ever had a black girlfriend. If not, why? Are he and the other anchors on PMSNBC racist? Where are the black primetime anchors on that seldomly watch channel? What gives?
beachmom
May 20th, 2010
12:08 pm
This goes to show that Libertarianism in theory sounds compelling, but in practice leads to policies that are impractical and negligent.
Jumbo G is the king of conventional thinking
May 20th, 2010
12:09 pm
Jean Shonaynay and Real American are racist. They see racists every where. Everyone can see that this Paul is not a racist. Nice try, libs. Ya’ll suck. And when you guys loose power in NOV, you can still call everyone racist if it makes ya’ll feel better. We no longer care what you pinko commie panty-wastes call us. Peace and hugs!
CrazyInGA
May 20th, 2010
12:11 pm
Yes, the Tea Party and Conservatives Republicans will LOVE this guy. He’s definitely their type of political candidate and will draw their constituents to the polls.
But, his types of politics don’t bother me at all. I chose not to do business with companies that cater to certain segments of our society. So, they can put up a NO BLACKS sign and I will gladly keep my money in my pockets. I would also like for them to put NO BLACKS on the products made or sold as well, so that I can chose not to make a purchase.
Keith
May 20th, 2010
12:12 pm
The Constitution guarantees us freedom of association, and if a business is privately owned (not publicly traded) then the owner(s) of that business have every right to determine who they will allow in whether or not that determination is based upon race, gender, sexual orientation, wealth, religion, political beliefs, or any number of dfferences. It should be just the same as our private home.
Conservative Democrat
May 20th, 2010
12:13 pm
Wow…..just wow.
W Herrod
May 20th, 2010
12:16 pm
The part of the discussion that Rand Paul doesn’t want to get nailed down on is likely this and he SHOULD have made the distinction yesterday: The government DOES NOT have the right to force a business to serve a black (or otherwise) customer but it does prohibit the business from doing business with a customer based on the color of his/her skin.
freethinker
May 20th, 2010
12:19 pm
Tea party taking this country back? Ha! Anyone that thinks the Tea Party is a new party is completely clueless. It is just a collection of far extreme right Republicans that have been ruining this country for the past several decades.
If they were so worried about taxes and spending, where were they when Republicans had control and drove this country into the ground? I find it very specious that the rise of this party coincides with the election of a Democrat to the White House.
Oh yeah, the race card? By the way, it wouldn’t be pulled so often if it wasn’t so true, y’all.
Terry
May 20th, 2010
12:22 pm
I think what the conversation is forgetting is the power of the public to vote with their feet. It is legal in over half the states for a private restaurant to not serve homosexual couples (yes, that’s right. Sexual orientation is not afforded heightened protection through 14th amendment). But do we see signs when we walk into the local diner or Applebee’s stating “we don’t serve people of same sex orientation”? No, of course not. It would be their death knell. If such a thing were to happen, people would start to vote with their feet and give their business to more tolerant business. I agree with Mr. Paul, not because I’m a racist (I’m not), but because i believe that the federal government does not need to regulate every aspect of our lives. If a business chooses to make a decision like that, word would get around and the populous would likely run the business out-of-business, the honest way. While the Civil Rights Act of ‘64 may have been a catalyst to change, it was the populace that initiated it. Just as the Civil Rights Act of 1871, dubbed the Klu Klux Klan Act, did not actually gain any traction until the 1930’s. The reason: there was no popular mandate to initiate change. Here Mr. Paul recognizes that idea. Let the populace, not the feds, dictate how they want to proceed.
atlantadomer
May 20th, 2010
12:23 pm
Calling all those identifying themselves as “Tea Partiers”…. It escapes me why no one is asking this following set of questions – so I will do it and hope those of you on here will answer honestly.
The Civil Rights act of 1964 and other pieces of legislation in American History dealing with the very same issue – institutional racism and discrimination, were roundly derided by what opponents termed “a majority of people in America”. It was proclaimed that “the will of the people was not heard” in the ram-rod passage of the laws.
So, Tea Partiers, do you feel the same way about the Civil Rights laws as you do the economic stimulus, healthcare reform, cap and trade?
The “Will of the People” was not heard?
The Snark
May 20th, 2010
12:25 pm
To the extent that they agree on anything other than the fact that they’re dissatisfied and angry, I think the Tea Partiers ARE trying to take the country back.
Back to 1953.
Arthur
May 20th, 2010
12:25 pm
what a nut job
Junius
May 20th, 2010
12:27 pm
The analogy between gun toters and minorities is nonsensical. One is a voluntary choice while the other is not.
Matt
May 20th, 2010
12:29 pm
It’s patently clear most of these self-described tea party followers are the same angry, racist white men that continue to embarass our country. You can try to hide behind pseudo-constitutional law interpretations – and think you actually have a clue. Don’t look now but President Obama TAUGHT constitutional law. Remember the little party he threw with the repbulican legislators on health care? And schooled them all day? This guy Rand Paul can’t even handle an interview.
Your ignorance is an embarassment… we have history’s worst environmental disaster underway in the gulf and you guys ask “what’s wrong with less government”? This on the tail of a monumental economic disaster created solely by a small government, supply-side adminisrtation who’s pro business policy of deregulation (translate for you: less government oversight) brought back the images of robber barons from 100 years ago.
You are kidding yourselves if you think the tea party has new ideas. Same old stuff, but this time – the actual majority is better informed and is learning to activate that power, quietly. Don’t look now but those “minorities” you speak of are majorities now in many areas… Time to get with the program people. Let us know when your IQ and education improve to the point where you can engage in an intelligent discussion on principle without resorting to racist and sexist digs.
PS: Not sure which is worse, your apparent ignorance about Maddow (she is a white female) or your potential homophobic inuendo (she also happens to be gay). What the $!(*&@# does any of that have to do with asking this guy Rand – a potential legislator, you know a guy that is going to write laws – what he knows about an historic piece of legislation? That is real journalism, not Faux News…
DoBoy
May 20th, 2010
12:34 pm
What would be interesting would be to hear his (or the Tea Party’s) position on Heart of Atlanta Motel vs. the US and clarifying the definition of “institutional” (ie. in reference to institutional racism).
I understand that the Tea Party believes in small/more limited government. The direct question is does the Tea Party believe that a private person’s right to choose clientele outweigh the government’s authority to prevent discrimination?
If so, that seems to go against the Heart of Atlanta ruling (and calls into question the Tea Party’s position on Civil Rights)…
Cutty
May 20th, 2010
12:36 pm
You’re against racism, but believe a a private company should have the right to discriminate based on race. Ookay!
Keep doing this GOP
May 20th, 2010
12:37 pm
Someone breaks into a private business, do they have the right to bar minorties from investing the break-in?
This guy is why people think the so-called tea party are racists. I believe i hear the backlash against the backlash starting.
Matt and Freethinker aren't so smart
May 20th, 2010
12:38 pm
Poor pathetic people that need to the government to do things for them. Your idea of free thinking is government dependence and control. Oh the irony as there is nothing free about that. People like you two are scared of
freedom because of your own weakness.
Think about that.
And Matt you say people are smarter, yet test scores and college entry exams show the exact opposite, so
I’ll put up $50000 to your 5000 and lets go test the knowledge of these so called smart people. It will be
a real pleasure taking your money.
Grandpa Right
May 20th, 2010
12:41 pm
Paul is legally correct- the constitution does allow private individuals and private business to associate with who they choose and to serve who they want to serve. It is not the federal governments place to enforce desegregation on private citizens. The feds authority should be limited to that granted to it no matter how offensive the action.
Stating this accurate, correct fact does not make one a racist. The reaction of the marketplace should punish businesses who practice objectionable policies. Lester reflected the all-too-common racism of the times- as did the white patrons who ate in his establishment knowing his policy.
Paul is correct in that even though it was mmorally offensive for a privately-owned entity without public funding to practice segregation, it was not illegal.
Keep doing this GOP
May 20th, 2010
12:43 pm
The analogy between gun toters and minorities is nonsensical. One is a voluntary choice while the other is not.
That hit the nail on the head. We have a CHOICE to carry a gun and do business that allows gun owners to carry them inside the private establishment. We do not choose what race we are ,what our geneitcs are , etc. etc.
????
May 20th, 2010
12:46 pm
Rand Paul is a REAL REPUBLICAN, I would rather vote for him than Johnny Bailout Isakson
Democrat Racist
May 20th, 2010
12:47 pm
Look here to read someof the hate speech uttered by the left.
http://hiphoprepublican.com/2006/08/top-racist-democrat-quotes_30.html
DoBoy
May 20th, 2010
12:52 pm
Grandpa – Doesn’t the Heart of Atlanta ruling establish that it IS the government’s place to enforce desegregation even in private establishments (at least to some degree)?
Oh Intown Writer...
May 20th, 2010
12:54 pm
Tea party-isms aside, what concerns me is the willingness to take on massive firestorm issues without having read the legislation. If he had simply taken the time to do his homework so he could argue his point without fear of being called out as uninformed, he’d be in a much better position and probably would be taken more seriously by his anticipated opponents.
Sorta like the health care debacle.
Which, as a small business owner with employees we care about and whose health care we thus already fund at 50% – is actually a benefit for us~
Chris Matthews is covered in his own spittle because he is drinking, again and because he is a racist
May 20th, 2010
1:04 pm
One of the recent examples of democrat racism from PMSNBC. Enjoy:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/01/27/msnbcs_matthews_on_obama_i_forgot_he_was_black_tonight.html
Marlboro Man
May 20th, 2010
1:18 pm
Party at the country club if elected.
Brian
May 20th, 2010
1:21 pm
Article I Section 8: To regulate Commerce…among the several States…
Regulate: …to bring under the control of law or constituted authority [M-W Dictionary]
From what I have learned, Plessey v. Ferguson (1896) developing into “separate but equal” was declared unconstutional in 1954 by Brown v. The Board of Education… Forms of segregation should not be resorted to or restored, but people should resort to the 14th Amendment if anyone experiences rights violations based on race. And why not when you have Black KKK (although, I don’t know alot about reasons or the issues)? Any supremacy based on race, etc. with an intent to deny or disparage Human and Civil Rights is wrong and unconstitutional. The Nature of our Liberty is to promote the general Welfare. And since the Civil War, I think it has a Nature to even ensure it in this Country.
From the beginning, President Grant, principally, includes protection for any race for helping Negroid or African American people (but, it is protection against acts of racism or acts from its origin. It is for all people.
Monroe v. Pape 365 U.S. 167 (1961):
“Mr. Shellabarger, reporting out the bill which became the Ku Klux Act, said of the provision with which we now deal: The model for it will be found in the second section of the act of April 9, 1866, known as the ‘civil rights act.’ . . . This section of this bill, on the same state of facts, not only provides a civil remedy for persons whose former condition may have been that of slaves, but also to all people where, under color of State law, they or any of them may be deprived of rights….”
Factoring that there are things that have to be worked out, this Nation has proven to be Progressive in Liberty, Freedom and Welfare for citizens, and all people.
Cheryl
May 20th, 2010
1:22 pm
Democrats are the racist. After reading the link provided by previous posters, I am going to forward those links to all in my address book. Shame on Democrats. Shame on those that will play the race card for political advantage. I am tired of the wild dishonest smears from the left. Engage on your ideas or leave public life.
A. C. Barham
May 20th, 2010
1:36 pm
This is a great discussion to have, to be practical every private business demands and require public support merely to exist. From the roads used to get to their business, the pipes that supply their water, and the sewers to remove their waste, the site security provided by public servants etc. Even using the argument that they pay for these services their shared paid does not meet the total cost, that is shared by all and the funds cannot be segregated and thus in a way we all support these private concerns and so they should be open to all. Now, for all those that are supportive of Dr. Paul’s position you have that right, but I ask you to think about how much we would have lost and the cost associated with that type position.
jack stilton
May 20th, 2010
1:38 pm
He is right the Federal Government does not have the right to tell any business what they can and cannot do with their business. Government controls everything else so we just go right along with it because we are all PC.
CW
May 20th, 2010
1:41 pm
Jumbo G, the Maddow fella is a woman (please read the first line of blog). Another example of an ignorant retrograde “taking back America”. You cannot read a full sentence. Turn on your radio and listen to Limbaugh’s soothing racist, facist gibberish.
Mugwump
May 20th, 2010
1:44 pm
Race baiting re-run incumbents and race baiting bottom feeding news media need to stiffle it. The USS America is sinking and it is silly to fight over who gets portside cabins. Debt, jobs, security and health are on most peoples minds and the old race tricks don’t work like they did in the past.
Will
May 20th, 2010
1:44 pm
This is an excellent example of what is wrong with trying to put a “pure” ideology ahead of what is good and right.
Although wanting to be “pure” in ideological thought, I have seldom seen a politician dodge a simple question as Paul did last night. It is all the more telling when he and other tea partiers present themselves as the “anti-politicians”, straight talking, telling it like it is folks.
It was a simple question. Do you believe it is the government’s role to protect the civil rights of its citizens in areas related to public accomodations?
Paul kept using the example of a owner’s right to deny a person from coming into the owner’s establishment with a loaded gun. He seemed to think this is a “liberal vs. conservative” issue because surely liberals would support the right of the owner to limit access based on possession of a loaded gun. I wish he would have been asked if he supported owner’s rights in this example. He seemed to oppose the owner’s right in this example but supports the owner’s rights to exclude based on skin color.
Oh well, just another politician trying to have it both ways. Certainly nothing special about this guy.
peace
May 20th, 2010
1:47 pm
I bet no one reading this blog has read the 64 Civil rights bill; why would a NPR jump on 40 year old news. I would have just said sorry dont know all the details; I know that racism is wrong and every person has equal rights.
and wasn’t it a Dem that said “Negro dialect”
and the repulicans have said “Paul’s win is scary for democracy”
sounds like the political machines are starting to rumble from fear of independent thinking
freethinker
May 20th, 2010
1:49 pm
Actually, there’s some great comments here about rights of private business. So, based on the ability to discriminate due to color because they are a private business, then the fire department and police department (which are public entities and do employ people of different races) should have the right now to respond to their needs. This also goes along with public services such as water, power, and sewer. So, I’m all for equal rights. Private businesses can be as they want, they just have to suffer the consequences of a society that is made up of many races.
So, which is it? You have your ability to discriminate then they will also have the ability to be discriminated against.
Jumbo G is the king of conventional thinking
May 20th, 2010
1:52 pm
Sorry, CW. Frankly I assumed he/she was a pre-op she that had taken the hormones and was dressing the part. I was trying to be PC.. Like I call Chasitity Bono a he since he/she had his/her addadicktome. Either way, he/she was race baiting and should be ashamed. Thank God no one watches that channel, I wouldn’t want the world to know that that kind of “journalism” passes for news. Hugs!
mmmm, mmmm, mmmmm, Barack the LIAR Obama
May 20th, 2010
1:59 pm
Pick, Pick, Pick…I am sure that will come up in the Senate for a vote, NOT! Let’s focus on the important things, like runaway spending and illegal immigration. If you need a tip on where to find one, ask Ms Obama (she of the terrorist fist bump) as she had the student right in front of her. Educating illegals on the tax of honest hard working Americans, I am so proud…..
BEND OVER, HERE COMES THE CHANGE
May 20th, 2010
2:06 pm
Let me know when you find the PERFECT candidate, jeeze.
mike
May 20th, 2010
2:12 pm
I just love it when white folks admit they are really racist. However the non-white people of this country are increasing each year in numbers. It will be interesting to see how white folks react when the tables are turned.
November
May 20th, 2010
2:15 pm
So, even though we are guaranteed individual freedom, our government can override that…..isn’t that communism? Our government is too big, too liberal and you’re gonna find out in November just how the conservatives feel about it. Jim, you’re a racist yourself and are just trying to stir something up in the name of the almighty dollar.
Jumbo G is the king of conventional thinking
May 20th, 2010
2:17 pm
Hey, CW, you meeley -mouthed lib phony American, Would you tell me where the black primetime anchors are at PMSNBC? Keep it up, libs. Everytime you play the race card and attempt to “create” news, you hurt your own credibility. Libs are sick, sad and on the way out of power!!!!! I predict that this made-up story will do the exact opp. of what you racist on the left want. The American people are tired of being called racist because of their political orientation (nice, huh, CW?). Paul and the GOP in general will find more and more $ and support because of “reporting” like this. Ya’ll are whistling past the grave yard as you lumber into political irrelevancy. HUGS!!!
DannyX
May 20th, 2010
2:23 pm
mike, the tables are turned. In places like DeKalb and Fulton black leadership has thrived on turning the tables. Georgia as a whole has become dysfunctional because instead of leadership we get petty racial politics. From both sides.
Warrior Woman
May 20th, 2010
2:39 pm
@Keith – even publicly traded companies are generally privately owned. They’re owned by the people and institutions that purchase the traded shares.