Johnson Did Help Give Life to King’s Dream
Expert guest post by Michael Fauntroy
Hillary Clinton has been taking a beating for a comment she recently made regarding
Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the role President Lyndon Johnson played
in bringing about the legislative change sought by the civil rights movement.
She noted that King’s dream began to come into focus when President Lyndon
Johnson supported and signed into law important civil rights legislation. Some
African Americans, sadly disconnected from the historical record, took the comment
as a slight to King’s legacy. Conservatives did what they usually do,
stoking the fire by suggesting that Clinton simply dissed the Black icon and
should be punished by African American voters. (Disclosure: Neither Clinton
nor Senator Barack Obama is my preferred presidential candidate). Clinton is
factually right and, after seeing the video of the comment, I am convinced that
she met no disrespect to King’s legacy.
 |
My interest in King is more than academic. I’m blessed to a nephew of
Rev. Walter Fauntroy, one of Dr. King’s chief lieutenants (he’s
the one to standing between King and Rep. Peter Rodino at the Voting Rights
Act of 1965 signing ceremony). He has long told me of his work during this period
and how the man (King) and the movement coalesced and unified the country, which
became outraged by what they saw on the evening news night after night. He also
told me something that I tell my students: ideas and movements mean nothing
if they don’t change public policy. Mass movements and demonstrations
are designed to prick the conscience of the country on a given issue. At that
point the legislative process takes over. That process must go through the president.
A supportive president can accelerate change. An obstinate president (see Bush,
G.W. – Iraq) can thwart a movement, even though it might have a majority
of support in Congress.
My uncle has told me a thousand times about how important Lyndon Johnson was
to making the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the
Fair Housing Act of 1968 a reality. He sacrificed his own favor with southern
conservatives to do the right thing. I see a particular irony that some southern
Black elected officials, some of whom owe their seats in Congress to the changes
effectuated by the Voting Rights Act, now criticizing Clinton for remembering
her civil rights history. Noting Johnson’s role is not disrespectful to
King’s legacy. It’s simply a historical fact. And Clinton’s
memory seems to be on target.
It’s my hope that the media and racially sensitive people of all stripes
will take a deep breath and relax a bit. Presidential candidates, talking all
the time every single day while on the campaign trail, will say things that
can easily be taken out of context. Responsible observers have to encourage
the public to pay closer attention to the issues rather than perceived slights
that don’t really exist. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to question
whether Hillary Clinton is best suited to win the Democratic presidential nomination
and the White House. Her comment on President Johnson and the civil rights movement
should not be among them.
Michael K. Fauntroy is an
assistant professor of public policy at George Mason University and author of
Republicans and the Black Vote. A registered Independent, he blogs at: MichaelFauntroy.com.
Comments are closed.