tional. I also believe that court-ordered discrimination is just as unconscionable and unconstitutional as any other type. However, courtordered discrimination is doubly dangerous because:

1. The courts were established to protect individual freedoms, and 2. If the judges can misuse their power to pervert our democracy by taking away the freedoms and rights of parents and schoolchildren, then all of our freedoms are in jeopardy.

I would add that courts cannot protect the rights of anyone by violating the rights of everyone. I am wearing this black armband today in mourning because I believe our living Constitution is being strangled to death by today's judges.

I believe, as I have indicated, we are presently confronted with the most crucial domestic issue of our time. The issue before us is:

(a) The issue that led to the Revolution of 1776;

(b) The issue that led to the most tragic war our country has ever experienced the Civil War; and

(c) The issue that today carries the threat of either mass civil disobedience or a major revolution in our country.

That issue is freedom of rights. That is the issue that led our forefathers to come to this country. It is the issue that led to the Revolution and formation of our democracy. And it is the issue that led to the Civil War. And it is the issue that will today lead to either mass civil disobedience or a revolution if the threat to it is not removed and control of the Government restored to Congress and the people. The U.S. Constitution is one of the greatest documents ever conceived by man to safeguard individual freedoms, and the judges are betraying that document. The very courts that were established to safeguard individual freedoms are now presided over by judges who are ordering that those individual freedoms be taken away from the people. In doing this, the judges are in violation of the following constitutional amendments established to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of the people:

1. ARTICLES IX, X, AND XIV OF OUR U.S. CONSTITUTION'S BILL OF

RIGHTS

Article IX. "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Article X. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people."

Article XIV. "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privilege or immunities of the citizens of the United States."

I also believe recent actions by the judges are in violation of our Declaration of Independence, which states:

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it and to initiate a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect

their safety and happiness. Prudence indeed will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

And then we get to the punch line of the Declaration of Independence:

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

Chairman CELLER. I notice that you underscored four lines of the portion of the Declaration of Independence and emphasized that “it is their duty to throw off such government." You don't mean that if the situation continues, there should be, as was the case after the Declaration of Independence, a revolution to overthrow the Government; do you?

Mr. O'NEIL. Mr. Chairman, I am saying that is a possibility that exists, either mass civil disobedience or revolution based upon the very principles of our Declaration of Independence, because the people in this country, the majority of people, black and white, particularly parents of schoolchildren, believe that their rights are threatened by the very courts that were established to safeguard these rights. Chairman CELLER. Do you counsel that?

Mr. O'NEIL. No, sir. And I will offer my recomemndation here as to what to do within the system, sir.

Chairman CELLER. Go ahead.

Mr. O'NEIL. I submit that such court-ordered abuses and usurpations of the individual freedoms and rights should not, cannot, and must not continue. The only fundamental and peaceful way to prevent this current threat to our constitutional rights of individual freedoms is a constitutional amendment to prevent the judges from ordering discrimination in the assignment of children to schools on the basis of race, color, creed, or national origin.

The blacks have practiced civil disobedience to insure their equal rights, in our day. More recently youths have practiced civil disobedience to protest the violation of their rights in an unconstitutional war. Now our country stands on the brink of mass civil disobedience by the parents of both black and white children who will not permit their rights and the rights of their children to be taken away, and taken away by the very judges who were established to safeguard these rights.

The vast majority of black and white parents believe that their rights and the safety and well-being of their children are being jeopardized by the courts, and this is evidenced in the latest Gallup poll which was just released. The people are extremely apprehensive because they fear that if the courts can violate the Constitution's Bill of Rights by authorizing court-ordered discrimination, then all our freedoms are in jeopardy.

For these reasons, including a deep concern for the welfare of our country and democracy, I ask, I beg, I plead with you to approve House Joint Resolution 620 in order that the States may ratify it to protect our freedoms and prevent a grave domestic tragedy from befalling our people and our democracy.

I make this statement as one who, in 1967, 6 weeks before the devastating riots in Detroit-at the Michigan Bar Conference on Crime and Delinquency, June 8, 1967-warned of that danger, only to be ignored.

I make this statement as one who has been intimately involved with people and education over the past decade. I make this statement as one who is committed to enhancing the opportunity for an integrated society and who has been deeply involved in the desegregation and busing issues as a member of the State Board of Education of Michigan.

The improvement of black schools is being neglected because the prevailing judicial prejudice narrows the discussion of the various means by which educational equity may be obtained for black Americans to desegregating schools. Such hostility on the part of judges toward majority black schools reinforces the assumption that majority black schools are inferior and therefore bad schools. This is a disservive to black Americans and it prevents the development of effective educational programs for all races.

Unfortunately, the judges of the lower courts have become hung up on racial manipulations to the point of obsession. They have seldom concerned themselves with the fundamental needs of equal opportunity for quality education. Nor have the judges concerned themselves with black pupil performance either before or after desegregation. In this regard, the judges have done a particular disservice to black children by assuming an automatic improvement in black pupil performance in desegregated schools.

In addition, judicial hostility to majority black schools infers and implies that majority black schools are inferior and therefore bad schools. In so doing, the judges have conspired to compel desegregation as a means of racial redress to the exclusion of all other means of redress. And if desegregation is as restrictive of black choice as segregation, then desegregation is neither legal nor just for either blacks or whites.

I submit to you Members of Congress and the people, that the major domestic issue of our time and society today is how to provide equal opportunity for quality education, and it is not how many blacks and whites are in each school.

Unfortunately, as I previously indicated, the lower courts are hung up to the point of obsession with racial manipulations rather than providing equal opportunity for quality education. Equally unfortunate is the fact that the courts are continuing to base their decisions on the 1965 Coleman report, which has since been refuted by HEW. The 1970 reevaluation of the Coleman report by HEW concluded that the single most important element in terms of pupil achievement is not socioeconomic factors nor school facilities and materials but it is the impact of the teachers and that is of greatest importance for children from low-income or disadvantaged backgrounds.

Unfortunately, court-ordered discrimination, no matter how well intended, will guarantee nothing in the way of better racial understanding. For, as one black writer in a Detroit paper said, "Didn't the Jews and Germans go to school together?" She then went on to say, "If this country wants citizens who understand and respect each other, they better teach them the fullest meaning of citizenship."

Gentlemen, I would suggest to you Members of Congress we better teach them respect for others before they are mixed artificially if we don't want that mixture to become a volatile one.

What, then, is the answer?

The answer is twofold:

1. Implementing the newly adopted common goals of Michigan education on a nationwide basis; and

2. Providing a K-16 system of free public education.

The new common goals of Michigan education were recently adopted after 2 years' effort and with public participation throughout the State and this was not only by educators but parents and students as well-and provide for:

1. Citizenship and morality. The development of youth as citizens who have self-respect, respect for others and the law-the most pressing need in our schools and society.

II. Democracy and equal opportunity.-Advance the principles of democracy by recognizing the worth of eevry individual and by respecting each person's right to equal educational opportunity. This includes:

(a) Adequate financial support for education and equity in the allocation of funds; and

(b) Greater community and parental participation in the educational system.

III. Student learning.-Help each individual acquire a positive attitude toward school and learning processes in order that he may achieve optimum personal growth and render service to society. This includes:

(a) Improve teaching of the three R's, and

(b) Career preparation to insure each high school graduate of a job entrance skill—which 75 to 80 percent of both black and white students need. Passage of Senate bill 569 will be most helpful in this regard.

I might add, the Esch-Steiger bill H.R. 11688, regarding manpower development and training, is also very much needed in order to insure equal opportunity and quality education for all students.

IV. Education improvement.-Provide actions which will lead to the attainment of the common goals. This includes:

(a) Better programs for training and retraining of teachers; (b) Improved methods of education, such as performance contracting;

(c) Improved assessment of educational achievement; and
(d) Educational accountability.

V. K-16 system of free public education.-Through the almost complete statewide system of community colleges in Michigan, we can move immediately to K-14 system of free public education.

In addition, by 1976, the 200th anniversary of our democracy, our Nation should celebrate that anniversary by insuring everyone in the country of an equal opportunity for quality education. This is the essence of our democracy and, by opening wide the doors to equal educational opportunity, we will open wide the doors to equal opportunity for jobs, housing, and all other opportunity in this great land of ours.

Wouldn't this be expensive? To a degree, yes-however, very inexpensive when compared to the costs of present-day crises.

Cost of crises, estimate for 1970:

Cost of crises, estimate for 1970:
Social welfare___

War and defense

Crime and delinquency.
Mental illness__.

Total

Billion

$160

80

51

20

311

Many of these costs in both dollars and human tragedy are as a result of the lack of equal opportunity for quality education.

In addition, the proposed educational programs directed toward equal opportunity for quality education are the best investment this country could possibly make and will return continuous dividends through the lives of those provided this opportunity.

Your assistance is essential if we are to clothe our past rhetoric with real substance by meeting the fundamental needs of our schools and society.

In closing, let me say I believe that in every crisis there is an opportunity. I am hopeful that you Members of Congress, who are the most representative group of the people in our Government, will seize this opportunity to:

1. Safeguard the rights of the people and Congress by approving House Joint Resolution 620 to amend the Constitution;

2. Adopt the Common Goals of Michigan Education, which were developed by the people, as a blueprint for the Nation to provide equal opportunity for quality education and provide a K-16 system of free public education; and

3. Approve an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to give power to the people to initiate constitutional amendment. This will insure that our democracy will not only continue as a democracy but will grow as a living example for the rest of the world to follow.

Presently, the people do not have an opportunity to initiate amendments to the U.S. Constitution. It is recommended that a constitutional amendment be approved to permit 10 percent of the electorate to initiate a constitutional amendment-similar to Michigan-which would then require ratification by a majority of voters in two-thirds of the States. This would insure people control of their Government and reduce the threat of an oligarchy controlling the people. Thank you very much.

(A document entitled "Special Report IV" by Mr. O'Neil follows:)