Congress, Politics, Society, Supreme Court

Massive Resistance and the Government Shutdown

 By Mike Appleton, Guest Blogger 

“We pledge ourselves to use all lawful means to bring about a reversal of this decision which is contrary to the Constitution and to prevent the use of force in its implementation. 

-The Southern Manifesto,  Cong. Rec., 84th Cong. 2d Session, Vol. 102, part 4 (March 12, 1956)

‘This was an activist court that you saw today.  Anytime the Supreme Court renders something constitutional that is clearly unconstitutional, that undermines the credibility of the Supreme Court.  I do believe the court’s credibility was undermined severely today.” 

-Michele Bachmann (R. Minn.),  June 26 2012

Most people are familiar with the opinion in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, et al., 349 U.S. 483 (1954), in which a unanimous Supreme Court summarily outlawed public school segregation by tersely declaring, “Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” 349 U.S. at 495.  But many people do not know that Brown involved a consolidation of cases from four states.  The “et al.” in the style refers to decisions on similar facts in Delaware, South Carolina and Virginia.  And the response of Virginia to the ruling in Brown provides an interesting comparison with the actions leading to the current government shutdown.

In 1951 the population of Prince Edward County, Virginia was approximately 15,000, more than half of whom were African-American.  The county maintained two high schools to accommodate 386 black students and 346 white students.  Robert R. Moton High School lacked adequate science facilities and offered a more restricted curriculum than the high school reserved for white students.  It had no gym, showers or dressing rooms, no cafeteria and no restrooms for teachers.  Students at Moton High were even required to ride in older school buses.

Suit was filed in federal district court challenging the Virginia constitutional and statutory provisions mandating segregated public schools.  Although the trial court agreed that the school board had failed to provide a substantially equal education for African-American students, it declined to invalidate the Virginia laws, concluding that segregation was not based “upon prejudice, on caprice, nor upon any other measureless foundation,” but reflected “ways of life in Virginia” which “has for generations been a part of the mores of the people.”  Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, 103 F. Supp. 337, 339 (E.D. Va. 1952).  Instead, the court ordered the school board to proceed with the completion of existing plans to upgrade the curriculum, physical plant and buses at Moton High School.  When the plaintiffs took an appeal from the decision, the Democratic machine that had for many years controlled Virginia politics under the firm hand of Sen. Harry Byrd had little reason to believe that “ways of life” that had prevailed since the end of the Reconstruction era would soon be declared illegal.

When the Brown decision was announced, the reaction in Virginia was shock, disbelief and anger. Reflecting the prevailing attitudes, the Richmond News Leader railed against “the encroachment of the Federal government, through judicial legislation, upon the reserved powers of the States.”  The Virginia legislature adopted a resolution of “interposition” asserting its right to “interpose” between unconstitutional federal mandates and local authorities under principles of state sovereignty.  And Sen. Byrd organized a campaign of opposition that came to be known as “Massive Resistance.”

In August of 1954 a commission was appointed to formulate a plan to preserve segregated schools.  Late in 1955, it presented its recommendations, including eliminating mandatory school attendance, empowering local school boards to assign students to schools and creating special tuition grants to enable white students to attend private schools.  Enabling legislation was quickly adopted and “segregation academies” began forming around the state.  Subsequent legislation went even further by prohibiting state funding of schools that chose to integrate.

In March of 1956, 19 senators and 77 house members from 11 southern states signed what is popularly known as “The Southern Manifesto,” in which they declared, “Even though we constitute a minority in the present Congress, we have full faith that a majority of the American people believe in the dual system of government which has enabled us to achieve our greatness and will in time demand that the reserved rights of the States and of the people be made secure against judicial usurpation.”

Throughout this period the Prince Edward County schools remained segregated, but when various court rulings invalidated Virginia’s various attempts to avoid integration, the school board took its final stand.  It refused to authorize funds to operate any schools in the district, and all public schools in the county were simply closed, and remained closed from 1959 to 1964.

There are striking similarities between Sen. Byrd’s failed plan of Massive Resistance and Republican efforts to prevent implementation of the Affordable Care Act.  There was widespread confidence among conservatives that the Supreme Court would declare the Act unconstitutional.  When that did not occur, legislators such as Michele Bachmann, quoted above, attempted to deny the legitimacy of the Court’s ruling.  Brent Bozell went further, denouncing Chief Justice Roberts as “a traitor to his own philosophy,” hearkening back to the days when southern roadsides were replete with billboards demanding the impeachment of Chief Justice Earl Warren.

The House of Representatives has taken over 40 votes to repeal the ACA, quixotic efforts pursued for reasons known only to John Boehner and his colleagues.  And in accordance with the Virginia legislative model, the House has attempted to starve the ACA by eliminating it from funding bills.  Following the failure of these efforts, Republicans have elected to pursue the path ultimately taken by the school board of Prince Edward County and have shut down the government.

Even the strategy followed by Republicans is largely a southern effort.  Approximately 60% of the Tea Party Caucus is from the South.  Nineteen of the 32 Republican members of the House who have been instrumental in orchestrating the shutdown are from southern states. It is hardly surprising therefore, that the current impasse is characterized by the time-honored southern belief in nullification theory as a proper antidote to disfavored decisions by a congressional majority.

In reflecting upon the experience of Virginia many years later, former Gov. Linwood Holton noted, “Massive resistance … served mostly to exacerbate emotions arrayed in a lost cause.”  Republicans would do well to ponder the wisdom in that observation.

1,677 thoughts on “Massive Resistance and the Government Shutdown”

  1. lottakatz:

    Currently, if you have a job, the government takes about 15% of your salary for SS, etc. You pay half and your employer pays half. The employer could pay more if he didnt have to pay half of those taxes.

    Your post implies that you think working men and women are too stupid to be able to invest and make a return on their money.

    The simple answer is to avoid mutual funds, most exist for the benefit of the fund manager. Or do a little research and find a decent one. It doesnt take a whole lot of effort to find a few good stocks, here are some of my favorites:

    Starbucks
    McDonalds
    Baker Hughes
    Arcelor Mittal
    Sedco
    Companhia de Bebidas das Americas

    If you take a person making $35,000/year and they save 12% [per Elaine] for 40 years [lets assume they start at age 18] and lets assume they never get a pay raise. They would retire at age 58 with a monthly income of:

    At 5% putting in 12% per month you would have 535,000 dollars at the end of 40 years.

    Savings produces $2,912 monthly after taxes and inflation.

    And you still have $535,000 in the bank to pass on to your children when you die.

    Inflation is going to kill you though. And inflation is the fault of the government.

    Social Security may be a good thing for those who cannot help themselves but for others it isnt good at all.

  2. Near Acadia National Park, shutdown’s effects will linger
    By Erin Ailworth
    Globe Staff
    October 18, 2013
    http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2013/10/17/near-acadia-shutdown-effects-will-linger/1pVNi6StOe0Vt36tPgXAWJ/story.html

    Excerpt:
    BAR HARBOR, Maine — The reopening of Acadia National Park Thursday came too late for Rich Oczkowski, owner of High Seas Motel.

    The 16-day partial shutdown of the federal government, at the end of his busy season, cut his usual October sales by half. He stood at his 37-room property — tucked amid dramatic ocean vistas and glorious fall foliage — contemplating how he and his pregnant wife will pay the mortgage, budget for the baby, and make it through the long off-season.

    In a difficult economy, he said, “You’re spread even thinner.”

    Oczkowski and this Downeast tourist town are among those who will feel the effects long after Washington turns to other issues.

    The shutdown sucked an estimated $24 billion from the US economy.

    The impact fell most heavily on industries such as aerospace, defense, food services for federal workers, and tourism related to national parks, economists said. The loss of economic activity will not derail the recovery, but it will slow a lackluster economy that desperately needs to accelerate.

    IHS Global Insight, a Lexington forecasting firm, projects the shutdown will cut economic growth this quarter by a half-percentage point to 1.5 percent — a rate that would probably generate too few jobs to lower the nation’s historically high unemployment.

    “It’s big in terms of growth rate, [and] that has to do with the fact that we weren’t growing that fast to begin with,” said Paul Edelstein, director of financial economics at IHS Global Insight.

    About 2 million visitors pass through Acadia and Bar Harbor during a short season that runs from May to the end of October. While summer is busiest, the money earned then by businesses pays the bills, said Chris Fogg, executive director of the Bar Harbor Chamber of Commerce. It’s fall sales that get banked and saved for the barren winter months.

  4. Bron,

    Lots of private businesses lost money because of the government shutdown. It was like a domino effect. Hotels, motels, restaurants, etc., near National Parks lost l money. A lot of private businesses that do contract work for the government lost money. The government does help to create jobs in private industry.

    *****

    Robert Samuelson Takes on NYT Editorial Board: Government Does Not Create Jobs!
    Thursday, 25 October 2012
    http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/robert-samuelson-takes-on-nyt-editorial-board-government-does-not-create-jobs

    Robert Samuelson was sufficiently outraged by a NYT editorial claiming that the government creates jobs that for the first time in his 35 years as a columnist he felt the need to attack a newspaper editorial. Samuelson called the NYT view “the flat earth theory of job creation” in his column’s headline. Since on its face it might be a bit hard to understand — there are lots of people who do work for the government and get paychecks — let’s look more closely at what Samuelson has to say on the topic.

    Samuelson tells readers:

    “It’s true that, legally, government does expand employment. But economically, it doesn’t — and that’s what people usually mean when they say ‘government doesn’t create jobs.’

    What the Times omits is the money to support all these government jobs. It must come from somewhere — generally, taxes or loans (bonds, bills). But if the people whose money is taken via taxation or borrowing had kept the money, they would have spent most or all of it on something — and that spending would have boosted employment.”

    Okay, so we can at least agree that all of those people working as teachers, firefighters, forest rangers etc. do legally have jobs. That seems like progress. But let’s look at the second part of the story:

    “the money to support all these government jobs. It must come from somewhere.”

    Yes, that part is true also. But the last time I looked, the money to pay workers at Apple, General Electric, and Goldman Sachs also came from somewhere. Where’s the difference?

    Samuelson tells us that if the government didn’t tax or borrow or the money to pay its workers (he makes a recession exception later in the piece) people “would have spent most or all of it on something — and that spending would have boosted employment.”

    Again, this is true, but how does it differ from the private sector? If the new iPhone wasn’t released last month people would have spent most or all of that money on something — and that spending would have boosted employment. Does this mean that workers at Apple don’t have real jobs either?

    The confusion gets even greater when we start to consider the range of services that can be provided by either the public or private sector. In Robert Samuelson’s world we know that public school teachers don’t have real jobs, but what about teachers at private schools? Presumably the jobs held by professors at major public universities, like Berkeley or the University of Michigan are not real, but the jobs held at for-profit universities, like Phoenix or the Washington Post’s own Kaplan Inc., are real.

    How about health care? Currently the vast majority of workers in the health care industry are employed by the private sector. Presumably these are real jobs according to Samuelson. Suppose that we replace our private health care system with a national health care service like the one they have in the U.K. Would the jobs in the health care no longer be real?

    If our new system was as efficient as the one in the U.K. we would not even need any additional tax revenue to pay for it. According to the OECD, the whole expense of the U.K., system, $3,433 per person in 2010, is less than the $3,967 per person (in 2010) that the government already pays for health care. So by replacing a less efficient private system with a more efficient public system will the government have eliminated all the real jobs in the health care sector?

    It keeps getting harder and harder to figure out what is supposed to be a real job in Robert Samuelson’s world. If the government requires drivers to buy auto insurance, do the people at the auto insurance companies have real jobs? Suppose the insurance companies were run by the government? Suppose that they were private but drivers paid for most of their insurance via a tax on gasoline? (You can have differential rates so that dangerous drivers pay an additional premium.)

    How about when the government finances an industry by granting it a state sanctioned monopoly as when it grants patent monopolies on prescription drugs. Do the researchers at Pfizer have real jobs even though their income is dependent on a government granted monopoly? Would they have real jobs if the government instead paid for research out of tax revenue and let drugs be sold in a free market, saving consumers $250 billion a year?

    Robert Samuelson obviously thinks there is something very important about the difference between working for the government and working in the private sector. Unfortunately his column does not do a very good job of explaining why. It would probably be best if he waited another 35 years before again attacking a newspaper editorial.

  5. lotta, Let me shock you, maybe not. Social Security needs some TOUGH fixes. Those tough fixes will be tough politically as well as personally for taxpayers. I am not opposed to means testing. That will need to be part of the equation. Now, if I was a person who paid into it and was means tested out of benefits, I would be pissed..rightfully so. But, this was always a Ponzi scheme @ its core, and the wealthy who don’t need it will be the victims, kinda like the Madoff victims. I think if you can prove you’re a Democrat you should be exempt form means testing. You may be wealthy, but you are not evil wealthy, you’re good wealthy. The last 2 sentences you should recognize as sarcasm.

  6. rafflaw:

    how did it cost the economy 20 billion dollars?

    You need to read Frederic Bastiat.

    20 billion dollars was not spent by government, it was used in the private sector to create real jobs. A real job is a job which funds itself and makes a profit for the capitalist to re-invest. Which in turn creates other jobs.

    If the tax money stopped tomorrow, how would government fund itself?
    Under the current system it couldnt.

  7. Bron: As I said above, some people think Obamacare is immoral.

    There are obviously different levels of immorality; starving somebody is more immoral than over-charging them for something that most people consider a necessity (by virtue of a vote). Keeping parents from receiving their dead children killed in battle defending the country, normally an entitlement we extend without qualm, over an extended and spiteful political squabble that cannot be won, is far more immoral than continuing to implement a flawed law that the country does not WANT overturned.

    I think Obamacare is immoral too, and I would replace it with Medicare for all in a heartbeat, but the way to correct it (no matter what you think the correction may be) is not to hold hostage the neediest people in the country, the most vulnerable and easily exploited. Which is what was done.

    You have claimed for years you believe in aid to those truly in need. If you do, then no matter how that aid is delivered (by taxation or charity), discontinuing it without any alternative in a battle that cannot be won (or is fought for self-interest) is an immoral act.

    You may think taxation for the purpose of delivering aid is an immoral act, but it is less immoral than killing people, or making them suffer, or causing them direct anguish and desperation. I think anybody that does not see that really has no empathy or caring about other people at all, and if that is the case, I am comfortable with tit-for-tat and returning to them that same level of empathy and caring for their feelings of selfish greed: None at all.

    1. Anytime that you “take” by force or coercion money from somebody it rightfully belongs to and give it to somebody it doesn’t rightfully belong to, it is ethically wrong. Not taking care of the less advantaged is a separate and distinct ethical issue. If we stopped the first unethical action, people would actually have more money to help the less advantaged. Remember, the bureaucracy eats up a lot of the money in administration. Health Insurance is not a Constitutional or inalienable right and I’m not sure we even want the government telling us how we should care for ourselves. The American Murder Association kills thousands of people each year. An example is the pitiful cure rate of less than three percent for the treatment of cancer with Chemo and radiation being the MO of the allopathic medical community. I don’t want to participate in such a system and surely don’t want to be forced to do so. So Congress passed a law that was unconstitutional and the Judiciary erroneous rubber stamped it, as they have abrogated many issued throughout our history. The Unlicensed Practice of Law, being on of the most destructive. We’ve allowed the ruling oligarchy to steal the wealth of our nation, through various unconstitutional redistribution of wealth schemes and rather then reverse the various abrogations, we are attempting to repair things that will just make it worse. We do not look closely at the negative ramifications of government policies because if we did, we would not enact the majority of them.

      1. hskiprob wrote: “Anytime that you “take” by force or coercion money from somebody it rightfully belongs to and give it to somebody it doesn’t rightfully belong to, it is ethically wrong. Not taking care of the less advantaged is a separate and distinct ethical issue. If we stopped the first unethical action, people would actually have more money to help the less advantaged.”

        Skip, you are exactly right here. Too many people forget that the government does not solicit payment voluntarily in exchange for services. They take by force our payments, under threat of imprisonment, and then they invent ways to spend it. The taking of our money is not one of need or necessity. Just look at how a charity like the Fisher house stepped forward to help with the death benefits, or how many States stepped forward to keep parks open. We do not need everything the federal government is trying to provide us. We can do it without them.

  8. Home states and districts are usually loyal to their senators and representatives in times of political crisis. But the continued support for Mr. Cruz among Texas Republicans illustrates something larger: the cultural and political divide that continues to widen between a red state that President Obama lost by nearly 16 points in the 2012 election and the blue or even purple parts of the country where Mr. Cruz’s tone and tactics have caused outrage and consternation.

    “Texas is not America,” said Matt Mackowiak, a Republican political consultant in Austin and the former spokesman for Mr. Cruz’s Republican predecessor in the Senate, Kay Bailey Hutchison. “It’s in America, but it’s not America. National polls don’t mean anything. Democrats haven’t won a statewide office in Texas since 1994. There are no Peter Kings in Texas.” http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/19/us/politics/texans-stick-with-cruz-despite-defeat-in-washington.html?hp&_r=0

  9. RWL,

    I was a teacher. I paid into the teacher retirement pension fund in my state–not into Social Security. I don’t get a check from Social Security. I qualified for Medicare through my husband. As for state workers, I believe different states have different rules:

    Retirement Planner: State and Local Government Employment
    http://www.ssa.gov/retire2/stateandlocal.htm

    Work for a state or local government agency, including a school system, college or university, may or may not be covered by Social Security.

    If you are covered by both your state or local pension plan and Social Security, you pay Social Security and Medicare taxes just as you would for any other Social Security covered job. You will see your earnings on your record.

    If you are covered only by your state or local pension plan,

    You don’t pay Social Security taxes and your earnings won’t be on your Social Security record. (Your record will, however, show your Medicare wages if you pay into that program.)

    Your pension from non covered state or local government employment may affect the amount of your

    Social Security benefit.
    Social Security benefit as a spouse.

  10. Blouise,
    I think Cruz used the Republicans to get his name out there and to get contributions to his presidential campaign.
    Bron, Cruz is dirty because he admitted that the shutdown was all about him getting cash and email information for his campaign. He initiated the shutdown and it cost the economy over $20 Billion dollars. He is also the same guy who “filibustered” the Senate and voted to end his own filibuster!

  13. Yes OS, I think the element that drove the shutdown will be prepared to man the barricades again. Because those guys are perhaps the most obdurate group to occupy Congress, post- antebellum. They won’t pass up an opportunity to create trouble. All they need to do is declare their actions in opposition to Obama, and in their minds it’ll be the best way to rally the troops. The Tea Party in Congress remind me of movies depictions of communist ideologues – prepared to bring about the destruction of everything near and dear for the sake of purity in the cause.

    Ted Cruz may not be joining them. Everyone thinks McConnell got his dam money for ensuring the votes to end any filibuster of the spending bill, but I think he put the screws to Cruz. That’s just my intuition, but why didn’t he put a hold on the bill?

  14. raff et al,

    The Republicans used Cruz in the same manner they used Bachmann, Palin, Jindra and others.

    Now I know everybody thinks The Speaker Orangeman is a dufus but please keep in mind that he is old party Republican. The Tea Party had to be given all the rope they needed to hang themselves because the Republicans want them gone by 2016. They’ll introduce a new branding for the folk that formed the “Moral Majority”, the “Christian Right”, the “Family Values”, the “Tea Party” in time for 2016 and those poor, dumb bunnies will fall for it again. They’ve been getting the shaft since Reagan and they still haven’t figured it out.

    Of course … the Democrats have used Hillary, Pelosi, Warren, and Feinstein in the same manner and women haven’t figured that one out either. 👿

  15. It’s a tax Nick. I worked in the city and lived in the county, I paid an employment tax to the city. When i lived in the city and worked in the county I didn’t have to pay the tax. I have 39 quarters of SS and 20 years of Medicare tax under my belt, for reasons specific to my family situation I won’t get that 40th quarter or be able to take advantage of Medicare for years if ever.

    Illegal aliens are working here illegally, paying taxes is part of their cover or in states that do not enforce deportation on a known illegal alien, it’s just a tax like anyone else would pay. Employers get the benefit of an illegal alien worker (and there are some benefits) and pay a tax.

    I’d like to have some of the benefit but… that’s just how it is. Taxes from people that won’t need or won’t use the benefits they buy, like me, contribute to those that will.

    1. Great Articles Elaine!

      A little off topic: Is it true that if you retire from working as a state employee, then your monthly state retirement pension off sets what you would have receive from your monthly social security check? In other words, instead of receiving the full monthly ss check, you would only receive a small percentage due to your monthly state pension\retirement payment? Some states are allowing retirees to take a lump sum. But if they do this they will lose out on their state’s medical benefits. Then, they can qualify for the monthly ss payment, and medicare and/or medicaid for their health insurance?

      Interesting Analysis LK!

  17. Bron, Since we are both self employed do you think a link showing us what the payroll tax rates, which WE PAY DOUBLE. was edifying? How could someone not know that basic fact? I’m pretty sure it wasn’t a ball bust.

  18. Bron,

    The Social Security tax deducted from a person’s pay is far less than 15% of one’s earnings:

    Topic 751 – Social Security and Medicare Withholding Rates
    http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc751.html

    The Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax includes two separate taxes. One is social security tax and the other is Medicare tax. Different rates apply for each of these.

    The current tax rate for social security is 6.2% for the employer and 6.2% for the employee, or 12.4% total. The current rate for Medicare is 1.45% for the employer and 1.45% for the employee, or 2.9% total.

    *****

    lotta,

    I paid into the teachers’ retirement pension fund. When I began teaching, it was 6% of a teacher’s salary. It has risen to 11% in Massachusetts. I also paid the FICA tax when I worked in retail and later at a private university.

  19. lotta, One of the many injustices of SS is illegal aliens do pay into SS and they get no benefits. You know how steep of a payroll tax workers and employers have to pay. To have been exempt from that for your entire career would have been pretty nice.

  20. RTC,
    I missed that comment by Mike A. That could be correct. Personally, I am skeptical that the debt limit is constitutional, in view of the full faith and credit clause. I wish it were either repealed or ruled unconstitutional by the SCOTUS. That would head off any more such mischief.

    As for February coming on, do you reckon the Repubs will try this stunt again just as election season begins? I think they have been outfoxed.

Comments are closed.