Hosted by the university of the south in sa womanny, tennessee. This discussion is about 90 minutes. Good morning, everyone. Good morning again. Thank you for joining our second session today. My name is woody register. I teach in the History Program here. I also am the director of the project on slavery, race, and reconciliation, the institutions endeavor to understand not only its particular history, but slavery and slaverys legacy but also the obligations that that history has bequeathed to us. Its my pleasure today to introduce our two speakers in order of their appearance. First up this morning is professor Tracy Campbell of the department of history of the university of kentucky. Professor campbell who received his ba from the university of kentucky and his pad at Duke University has a remarkable record of teaching and scholarship on the political and social history of the United States and the 20th century. Before arriving at kentucky, he taught at morris hill and union colleges. And since hes been at kentucky he has been recognized not only for his scholarship, but especially for his skill as a classroom teacher. Hes the author of numerous articles and five major books, including most recently his 2013 study of the gateway arch in st. Louis which he tellingly calls a biography. Perhaps most directly related to our semiposium today is his 2005 work. Delivered the vote, history of lerks fraud and american political tradition, 1742 to 2004. Surely this is a book that we need to take up today if not for the first time then even a second time. At present, he is hard at work on a history of the year 1942 subtitled americas year of peril. The meaning of which will become clearer to us with his presentation today. Voting rights under stress, soldiers, poll taxes, and race in the 1942 election. Our second panel list is hank klibanoff. A professional of journalism at emory university. A native of florence, alabama, and a graduate of university in st. Louis and mat dill school of journalism in northwestern. He joined the faculty of emory after more than three decades of working as a reporter and editor at the nations most distinguished newspapers. Among them the boston globe, the Ballistic Missile inquirier and atlantas journal constitution. The 2007 book that he coauthored with his fellow journalist gene roberts, the race beat, the press, the civil rights struggle and the awakening of a nation won the Pulitzer Prize for history that year. The New York Times described the race beat as a richly text tured and balanced narrative that reveals the strengths and weaknesses of the news media as well as personal and contingent factors, the subtle negotiations, missed opportunities, and sometimes heroic efforts that influence the ontheground coverage of the movement and its opponents. No doubt this book, like that of professor campbell, needs to be read or reread today. In recent years professor klibanoff has deflected the georgia cold rights project which enlists emory undergraduates in investigating the history of the jim crow era in georgia by investigating unsolved or unpunished racially motivated crimes, murders, that occurred in that state. His talk today reflects the work of his journalistic career and leadership of the cold case project. The whites only primaries last gasp, how it played out on the unyielding soil of georgia. So please join me in welcoming this morning for their insights and reflections on the history of voting in the United States. Professor campbell. [ applause ] thank you. Thank you, woody, for that very kind introduction. And thanks to the university of south for inviting me to such a timely and really remarkable gathering and to you president mccartal for your kind hospitality and to tanner pots for make the trains run on time. We appreciate it. Im going to talk about a snapshot this morning of the United States in a particular year in a particular moment. The premise for my paper is pretty straightforward. If you want to understand some of the realities of Voting Rights, then i think its useful to observe those rights when the country is under its greatest stress. When its very survival is really on the line. And just as individuals or families can undergo stress or trauma, so can countries. And those moments expose a persons or a countrys inherent strengths and flaws quite like nothing else. Things tend to rise to the surface under that kind of pressure. In the 20th century, that stress was never greater than in the year following the attack on pearl harbor. And the americas entry into world war ii which of course is nine fooen teen 42. The way that the country debated Voting Rights that year in war time and conducted a national election, i think if we look at the context of it tells us a good deal about the fragile nature of american democracy and the way in which the 15th amendment was negated for millions of people at a crucial moment. Now, theres a collective narrative really about 1942, and i think we sometimes think we read history backward. We know were going to win the war so we we kind of gloss over some things. But if were going to look at 1942, i think its helpful to try to understand it on its own terms. But the collective narrative which is symbolized by this portrait kind of goes like this. After a little bit of early panic and worry, the nation came together built a massive production mayor cal. We cast partisan and sectional differences aside and once the allies turned back the japanese midway and landed in north africa, ultimate victory was in sight. At home and abroad we came together. Unity was, you know, the common theme led in tom broke cauls words by, quote, the greatest generation any society has ever produced, end of quote. I think, though, that if were going to understand 1942 we also have to see a different reality. And this is a series of paintings by Thomas Hart Benton done in 1942 in reaction to pearl harbor. He called about eight of these paintings americas year of peril, nine fooen te1942. This one is so different than many of the other themes, what was possible. This is the time when the federal government is selling insurance policies against attack and people as far inland as iowa are buying these policies to try to make sure they would be protected against any kind of foreign attack. At a time in which some within the government worried that we might lose the war, or that areas along both coasts or well inland could be subject to many more attacks, at i time in which one former president called upon the nation to give Franklin Rooseve roosevelt dictatorial powers, they wanted to make sure this would not be used to expose some voter rights. Thats what id like to talk about this morning. I want to focus on two moments that happened in the fall of 1942 that i think are particularly instructive. One occurred in september. As congress considered an issue that seemed on its face a rather straightforward matter without any ulterior political motives. With Upcoming Elections approaching congress debated a bill that would allow soldiers serving away from home to vote via absentee ballot. But this time in september, over 4 million americans were serving in the military and almost all of them of course would not be home in their precinct to vote on election day. So at a time in which democracy itself was at stake, what better way to display its endearing character than by committing those who are putting their lives on the line to vote for their respective leaders. Legislators facing reelection had the support of veterans groups and of course families of soldiers. Yet, when represea representati the Third District of tennessee not far from here inserted an amendment that waived the poll tax requirement from soldiers from eight southern states, the matter exposed one of the underlying fault lines of american politics. If the poll tax could be waived in this one specific circumstance, some worried that it could be used as a wedge and outtlau outlaw it in other election dollars. And that was a threat to others who thought it was unconstitutional assaults on sta sovereignty. It was an attack on White Supremacy. They actually said these things. If theres one thing about the 40s that were glad about, they just said it. Theres no code of trying to say what they actually meant. Youll see what i mean in a few minutes. He said it was an attempt to indicator cater to the soldier vote at the expense of our foundation of democracy, end of quote. Now, since reconstruction, poll taxes were among some of the most effective ways along with violence and literacy tests in the white primary of keeping African Americans from voting. Heres a particular poll tax receipt from texas, i believe its 1. 75. Most poll taxes were between 1 an 2. And they were cumulative. If you missed a primary or special election you had to make up on that third time so you could never get by without paying them. Into 1942 they were still in effect in eight states. The poll tax kept about 11 Million People from voting. And by 1940, its estimated approximately 3 of African Americans in the south were registered to vote. Poll taxes also kept poor whites from voting. While 66 of adults in nonpoll tax states voted in 1940, about 24 voted in those eight poll tax states. And they skewed the whole idea of Representative Democracy. Historian Glenda Gilmore notes that in 1940 georgias edward goober cox had been elected to his seat by 5,187 votes while a Washington State representative won his seat with 147,000. Now, through their iron grip on Voting Rights, southern democrats were elected time and time again. Heres a cartoon about the poll tax. And if you can make out some of the figures, they might look somewhat familiar because this is dr. Suess who was a cartoonist who worked a lot with a periodical called pm. Through their iron grip on Voting Rights, southern democrats were elected time and time again and their subsequent seniority meant chairmanships on crucial committees. In 1942 as we go to war, southerners chair seven of the ten most powerful senate committees, including agriculture, finance, foreign relations, and rules. Now, no one in the house was more opposed to this amended soldier voting act than mississippis john ranken. In waiving the poll tax for soldiers, they say saw dangerous elements approaching. He said this was a long range attempt to change our form of government. It would take the americans to control elements and give it to irresponsibility elements that are constantly trying to destroy private enterprise and stir up trouble, end of quote. Rank aens arguments against the bill failed to win over a majority of his house colleagues who passed the bill on september 9th. But an outrage ranken called the final bill, quote, nothing more than a scheme to abolish state governments and he added that the next step will be to abolish congress, end of quote. Ill remind you they actually said this. The Senate Passed the bill although senators tom connelly of texas and lifter hill of alabama said that in the process of approving the measure the senate, quote, had ruptured constitutional processes. Opponents of the bill understood the political implications of denying sold yeriers the right vote and were reluctant to wage a full scale filibuster. They had to take their medicine that the particular moment. President roosevelt signed it into law on september 16th which required the war and Navy Departments to distribute postal cards to member of the armed forces who could then request a ballot from their state. And this cumbersome process meant it was too late to be fully operational on election day coming up in 48 days. But the poll tax debate is not quite over. Ill get to it in just a moment. So if we go to the election itself, the Roosevelt Administration in the fall of 1942 has reason to worry. In a previous Congressional Election in world war i in 198018, republicans had won five senate seats and 25 house seats to take control of both houses. Throughout 1942, voters were frustrated with a lot of things, the slow pace of the war, gas and food rationing, higher taxes, and congressional inaction on inflation. Congress had moved swiftly early in the year to give themselves pensions which produced another widespread outcry and a quick reversal just weeks later. So while fdr himself might not have been on the ballot, it was kind of becoming a referendum of sorts and to his handling and the administrations handling of the war. Some worried that fdr might use his wartime powers to cancel the election altogether. So with all that was at stake, life magazine predicted that the november elections, quote, might be among the most fateful in u. S. History, end of quote. In a gallop poll taken on the eve of the 1942 election showed that americans favored democrats about 52 to 48. But on election night, republicans shocked many observers by picking up 43 house seats, nine senate seats making it the greatest gain by the Opposition Party in mid trm electio term elections since 1980 teen. You can see how they shrunk particularly in the house 267 to 165 spread was changed to a bear 222 to 209 option. With a switch of seven democrats in the house, republicans could defeat any administration measure. Cons kwe consequently the power of the southern block increased and house members like john ranken and martin deeds were elected to their house seats without any opposition. Among the newly elected senators was mississippis james o. Eastland, a wealthy plantation owner who had become one of the leading opponents of Voting Rights for the next 30 years. He was among eight southern democrats in the sfwhiet won their general election without facing any opposition. Now, the results of the 1942 elections were often interpreted in sweeping terms. The Chicago Tribune which, of course, hated roosevelt said, quote, the people of this land have turned back the most terrible threat which has confronted them in their national history. End of quote. Time magazine was fwlunblunt in appraisal. No one can say in the retrospect of history when one Political Movement dies and another is born. But anyone who looked at the election last week could see that Franklin Roosevelts new deal was sick, end of quote. The gops success in 23 states with combined Electoral College vote of 321 votes spelled potential disaster for fdr or for anyone else who might be thinking of running on the democratic ticket in 1944. When i think of interpreting the election in such sweeping terms misses another point. Election witnessed the lowest turnout, 33. 9 for a congressional race in the 20th century. Lower than even the 2014 Congressional Election. All though the soldier voting act of 42 had been passed in september allowing soldiers to vote, only 28,000 actually could vote. Less than 1 of those serving overseas. So interpreting what the American People thought or felt about 1942, its hard to get at from the election results. But regardless of the turnout, the election had immediate consequences. Two remaining agencies from the new deal, the wpa and the ccc were quickly abolished. Efforts to expand Social Security and medical insurance were thwarted. Yet the political wins were not necessarily reflected in the election. I think hides some underlying impulses. For example, in a poll taken by Fortune Magazine in november, the outlines of what some people hope for after the war provides a glimpse that i dont think a lot of americans understand. 74 of americans polled said that they thought the government should collect enough taxes after the war to provide medical care for anyone who needed it. Three out of four. 67 wanted enough the government to provide jobs for people if they were willing and able to work in case of a recession. And maybe even most astonishing, 31. 9 , almost one out of three believe after the war there should be a law limiting an amount of money an individual could earn. And that was similar to what because roosevelt was proposing a 25,000 limit on incomes in 1942 which was also very popular. When asked, quote, do you think some form of socialism would be a good thing or a bad thing, 25 said it would be good, 34 werent quite sure yet. So thats one moment. The second moment when Voting Rights i think are exposed came after the election. When the senate convened a bill convened to consider a house bill that had been sponsored by representative lee geyer, a california democrat who had died in 1941 but had sponsored this bill many months before to end poll taxes altogether in federal elections. Although the bill faced solid opposition obviously from southern democrats who said the war, quote, wage war against the white people of the southern states, it passed the house. But when it came to the smat en it faced a filibuster. And this time without soldiers involved the governors were ready to launch a filibuster. And the filibuster was led by many people including theodore bill bow of mississippi and Richard Russell of georgia. Together with other southern senators, they brought the senate to a stand still for seven days in november of 1942. As endless quorum calls were demanded as well as complete readings of the journal. Billbo made it clear if this next step passes we will remove the registration qualifications and then the education qualifications. Once than was done he said we will have no way of preventing negros from voting, end of quote. Richard russell defended reconstruction and the hition triv Race Relations in his state saying, quote,