Coalition-building and the politics of electoral capture during the Nixon administration: African Americans, labor, latinos

Studies in American Political Development

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 131-161

  Frymer, Paul ^a   Skrentny, John David ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032372667     PISSN: 0898588X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0898588X9800131X     Document Type: Article

References (138)

1. For helpful comments, we would like to thank Shana Bass, Michael Brown, Scott James, David Mayhew, Corey Robin, Joel Silbey, Pam Singh, Stephen Skowronek, Tom Sugrue, Rick Valelly, and the anonymous reviewers for Studies in American Political Development.
2. See Thomas J, Sugrue, The Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), esp. chap, 8; and Jonathan Rieder, Canarsie: The Jews and Italians of Brooklyn Against Liberalism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985).
3. See Thomas J, Sugrue, The Origins of the Urban Crisis: Race and Inequality in Postwar Detroit (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), esp. chap, 8; and Jonathan Rieder, Canarsie: The Jews and Italians of Brooklyn Against Liberalism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985).
4. See Edward G. Carmines and James A. Stimson, Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989); and Thomas Byrne Edsall with Mary D. Edsall, Chain Reaction; The Impact of Race, Rights, and Taxes on American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1991).
5. See Edward G. Carmines and James A. Stimson, Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989); and Thomas Byrne Edsall with Mary D. Edsall, Chain Reaction; The Impact of Race, Rights, and Taxes on American Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 1991).
6. See Nicol C. Rae, The Decline and Fall of the Liberal Republicans From 1952 to the Present (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989); and A. James Reichley, Conservatives in an Age of Change (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute, 1981). Reichley, for instance, counts the number of moderates and progressives as representing a little more than one-third of the Republican party's congressional coalition for the Ninety-first Congress. Another one-third of the Republican's congressional members, labeled by Reichley as "stalwarts," "remained generally loyal to the Republican party's progressive tradition. Memories of forebears who had been active in the abolitionist movement or who had fought in the Civil War helped produce votes among the stalwarts for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965," (p. 24).
7. See Nicol C. Rae, The Decline and Fall of the Liberal Republicans From 1952 to the Present (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989); and A. James Reichley, Conservatives in an Age of Change (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute, 1981). Reichley, for instance, counts the number of moderates and progressives as representing a little more than one-third of the Republican party's congressional coalition for the Ninety-first Congress. Another one-third of the Republican's congressional members, labeled by Reichley as "stalwarts," "remained generally loyal to the Republican party's progressive tradition. Memories of forebears who had been active in the abolitionist movement or who had fought in the Civil War helped produce votes among the stalwarts for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965," (p. 24).
8. Here we have in mind an elaboration of what Stephen Skowronek calls the "politics of preemption." See Skowronek, The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to George Bush (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993).
9. For the purposes of this paper, we do not distinguish the strategic behavior of Richard Nixon from that of the Republican party. Clearly, the two are distinguishable in many different ways. In fact, as Sidney Milkis has persuasively argued, presidential aspirations often conflict with party aspirations, Richard Nixon's political goals, in particular, often worked to the detriment of the Republican party as an organization. See Milkis, The President and the Parties: The Transformation of the American Party System Since the New Deal (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), specifically chap. 9. Nonetheless, Nixon's position vis-à-vis the Republican party organization is less important for our argument than the fact that he and the rest of the party leadership face similar strategic incentives as political actors attempting to put together a winning coalition within the constraints and framework of a winner-take-all electoral system.
10. See Anthony Downs, An Economic Theory of Democracy (New York: Harper and Row, 1957).
11. See John H. Aldrich, Why Parties: The Origin and Transformation of Party Politics in America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), chap. 6; and Angelo Panebianco, Political Parties: Organization and Power (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988).
12. See John H. Aldrich, Why Parties: The Origin and Transformation of Party Politics in America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), chap. 6; and Angelo Panebianco, Political Parties: Organization and Power (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988).
13. See Steven J. Rosenstone and John Mark Hansen, Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America (New York: Macmillan, 1993).
14. See Scott C. James, "Building a Democratic Majority: The Progressive Party Vote and the Federal Trade Commission," Studies in American Political Development 9 (fall 1995): 331-85.
15. See Austin Ranney and Willmoore Kendall, Democracy and the American Party System (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1956), 508: party competition, they argue, assures that "no group has reason to feel that the rest of society is a kind of giant conspiracy to keep it out its legitimate 'place in the sun.' No group feels that it may at any moment have to drop everything else and defend itself against onslaught by some other group." Similarly, William Keefe wrote that "parties are remarkably hospitable to all points of views and to all manners of people," while Frank Sorauf agreed that "neither party ignores or writes off the political interests and aspirations of any major group (Keefe, Parties, Politics, and Public Policy in America [New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972], 10; Sorauf, Political Parties in the American System [Boston: Little, Brown, 1964]). Also see, E. E. Schattschneider, Party Government (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1942), 1, 88, and 209. To recognize how commonplace this view the political science literature, see John Kenneth White, "E. E. Schattschneider and the Responsible Party Model," PS 25 (June 1992): 167-71; as well as prominent textbooks such Theodore J. Lowi and Benjamin Ginsberg, American Government (New York: W.W. Norton, 1996); and Edward S. Greenberg and Benjamin I. Page, The Struggle for Democracy (New York: Harper Collins, 1995).
16. See Austin Ranney and Willmoore Kendall, Democracy and the American Party System (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1956), 508: party competition, they argue, assures that "no group has reason to feel that the rest of society is a kind of giant conspiracy to keep it out its legitimate 'place in the sun.' No group feels that it may at any moment have to drop everything else and defend itself against onslaught by some other group." Similarly, William Keefe wrote that "parties are remarkably hospitable to all points of views and to all manners of people," while Frank Sorauf agreed that "neither party ignores or writes off the political interests and aspirations of any major group (Keefe, Parties, Politics, and Public Policy in America [New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972], 10; Sorauf, Political Parties in the American System [Boston: Little, Brown, 1964]). Also see, E. E. Schattschneider, Party Government (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1942), 1, 88, and 209. To recognize how commonplace this view the political science literature, see John Kenneth White, "E. E. Schattschneider and the Responsible Party Model," PS 25 (June 1992): 167-71; as well as prominent textbooks such Theodore J. Lowi and Benjamin Ginsberg, American Government (New York: W.W. Norton, 1996); and Edward S. Greenberg and Benjamin I. Page, The Struggle for Democracy (New York: Harper Collins, 1995).
17. See Austin Ranney and Willmoore Kendall, Democracy and the American Party System (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1956), 508: party competition, they argue, assures that "no group has reason to feel that the rest of society is a kind of giant conspiracy to keep it out its legitimate 'place in the sun.' No group feels that it may at any moment have to drop everything else and defend itself against onslaught by some other group." Similarly, William Keefe wrote that "parties are remarkably hospitable to all points of views and to all manners of people," while Frank Sorauf agreed that "neither party ignores or writes off the political interests and aspirations of any major group (Keefe, Parties, Politics, and Public Policy in America [New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972], 10; Sorauf, Political Parties in the American System [Boston: Little, Brown, 1964]). Also see, E. E. Schattschneider, Party Government (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1942), 1, 88, and 209. To recognize how commonplace this view the political science literature, see John Kenneth White, "E. E. Schattschneider and the Responsible Party Model," PS 25 (June 1992): 167-71; as well as prominent textbooks such Theodore J. Lowi and Benjamin Ginsberg, American Government (New York: W.W. Norton, 1996); and Edward S. Greenberg and Benjamin I. Page, The Struggle for Democracy (New York: Harper Collins, 1995).
18. See Austin Ranney and Willmoore Kendall, Democracy and the American Party System (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1956), 508: party competition, they argue, assures that "no group has reason to feel that the rest of society is a kind of giant conspiracy to keep it out its legitimate 'place in the sun.' No group feels that it may at any moment have to drop everything else and defend itself against onslaught by some other group." Similarly, William Keefe wrote that "parties are remarkably hospitable to all points of views and to all manners of people," while Frank Sorauf agreed that "neither party ignores or writes off the political interests and aspirations of any major group (Keefe, Parties, Politics, and Public Policy in America [New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972], 10; Sorauf, Political Parties in the American System [Boston: Little, Brown, 1964]). Also see, E. E. Schattschneider, Party Government (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1942), 1, 88, and 209. To recognize how commonplace this view the political science literature, see John Kenneth White, "E. E. Schattschneider and the Responsible Party Model," PS 25 (June 1992): 167-71; as well as prominent textbooks such Theodore J. Lowi and Benjamin Ginsberg, American Government (New York: W.W. Norton, 1996); and Edward S. Greenberg and Benjamin I. Page, The Struggle for Democracy (New York: Harper Collins, 1995).
19. See Austin Ranney and Willmoore Kendall, Democracy and the American Party System (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1956), 508: party competition, they argue, assures that "no group has reason to feel that the rest of society is a kind of giant conspiracy to keep it out its legitimate 'place in the sun.' No group feels that it may at any moment have to drop everything else and defend itself against onslaught by some other group." Similarly, William Keefe wrote that "parties are remarkably hospitable to all points of views and to all manners of people," while Frank Sorauf agreed that "neither party ignores or writes off the political interests and aspirations of any major group (Keefe, Parties, Politics, and Public Policy in America [New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972], 10; Sorauf, Political Parties in the American System [Boston: Little, Brown, 1964]). Also see, E. E. Schattschneider, Party Government (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1942), 1, 88, and 209. To recognize how commonplace this view the political science literature, see John Kenneth White, "E. E. Schattschneider and the Responsible Party Model," PS 25 (June 1992): 167-71; as well as prominent textbooks such Theodore J. Lowi and Benjamin Ginsberg, American Government (New York: W.W. Norton, 1996); and Edward S. Greenberg and Benjamin I. Page, The Struggle for Democracy (New York: Harper Collins, 1995).
20. See Austin Ranney and Willmoore Kendall, Democracy and the American Party System (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1956), 508: party competition, they argue, assures that "no group has reason to feel that the rest of society is a kind of giant conspiracy to keep it out its legitimate 'place in the sun.' No group feels that it may at any moment have to drop everything else and defend itself against onslaught by some other group." Similarly, William Keefe wrote that "parties are remarkably hospitable to all points of views and to all manners of people," while Frank Sorauf agreed that "neither party ignores or writes off the political interests and aspirations of any major group (Keefe, Parties, Politics, and Public Policy in America [New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972], 10; Sorauf, Political Parties in the American System [Boston: Little, Brown, 1964]). Also see, E. E. Schattschneider, Party Government (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1942), 1, 88, and 209. To recognize how commonplace this view the political science literature, see John Kenneth White, "E. E. Schattschneider and the Responsible Party Model," PS 25 (June 1992): 167-71; as well as prominent textbooks such Theodore J. Lowi and Benjamin Ginsberg, American Government (New York: W.W. Norton, 1996); and Edward S. Greenberg and Benjamin I. Page, The Struggle for Democracy (New York: Harper Collins, 1995).
21. See Austin Ranney and Willmoore Kendall, Democracy and the American Party System (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1956), 508: party competition, they argue, assures that "no group has reason to feel that the rest of society is a kind of giant conspiracy to keep it out its legitimate 'place in the sun.' No group feels that it may at any moment have to drop everything else and defend itself against onslaught by some other group." Similarly, William Keefe wrote that "parties are remarkably hospitable to all points of views and to all manners of people," while Frank Sorauf agreed that "neither party ignores or writes off the political interests and aspirations of any major group (Keefe, Parties, Politics, and Public Policy in America [New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972], 10; Sorauf, Political Parties in the American System [Boston: Little, Brown, 1964]). Also see, E. E. Schattschneider, Party Government (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1942), 1, 88, and 209. To recognize how commonplace this view the political science literature, see John Kenneth White, "E. E. Schattschneider and the Responsible Party Model," PS 25 (June 1992): 167-71; as well as prominent textbooks such Theodore J. Lowi and Benjamin Ginsberg, American Government (New York: W.W. Norton, 1996); and Edward S. Greenberg and Benjamin I. Page, The Struggle for Democracy (New York: Harper Collins, 1995).
22. See Kenneth Benoit and Kenneth A. Shepsle, "Electoral Systems and Minority Representation," in Classifying by Race, ed. Paul E. Peterson (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995).
23. Martin Shefter, Political Parties and the State (Princeton: Princeton 1994), 7. For historical accounts on the expansion of white suffrage during the party system, see Shefter, Political Parties, chap. 3; and Richard P. McCormick, "Political Development and the Second Party System," in The American Party Systems, ed. William Nisbet Chambers and Walter Dean Burnham (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), 90-116. On the ways in which nineteenth century mass-based parties enhanced democratic behavior, see Joel H. Silbey The American Political Nation, 1838-1893 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991). On bene fits provided by the urban machine, or at least the machine in its "embryonic stage," see Steven P. Erie, Rainbow's End (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), chap. 1-3; and Robert A. Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961), 32-62.
24. Martin Shefter, Political Parties and the State (Princeton: Princeton 1994), 7. For historical accounts on the expansion of white suffrage during the party system, see Shefter, Political Parties, chap. 3; and Richard P. McCormick, "Political Development and the Second Party System," in The American Party Systems, ed. William Nisbet Chambers and Walter Dean Burnham (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), 90-116. On the ways in which nineteenth century mass-based parties enhanced democratic behavior, see Joel H. Silbey The American Political Nation, 1838-1893 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991). On bene fits provided by the urban machine, or at least the machine in its "embryonic stage," see Steven P. Erie, Rainbow's End (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), chap. 1-3; and Robert A. Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961), 32-62.
25. Martin Shefter, Political Parties and the State (Princeton: Princeton 1994), 7. For historical accounts on the expansion of white suffrage during the party system, see Shefter, Political Parties, chap. 3; and Richard P. McCormick, "Political Development and the Second Party System," in The American Party Systems, ed. William Nisbet Chambers and Walter Dean Burnham (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), 90-116. On the ways in which nineteenth century mass-based parties enhanced democratic behavior, see Joel H. Silbey The American Political Nation, 1838-1893 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991). On bene fits provided by the urban machine, or at least the machine in its "embryonic stage," see Steven P. Erie, Rainbow's End (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), chap. 1-3; and Robert A. Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961), 32-62.
26. Martin Shefter, Political Parties and the State (Princeton: Princeton 1994), 7. For historical accounts on the expansion of white suffrage during the party system, see Shefter, Political Parties, chap. 3; and Richard P. McCormick, "Political Development and the Second Party System," in The American Party Systems, ed. William Nisbet Chambers and Walter Dean Burnham (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), 90-116. On the ways in which nineteenth century mass-based parties enhanced democratic behavior, see Joel H. Silbey The American Political Nation, 1838-1893 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991). On bene fits provided by the urban machine, or at least the machine in its "embryonic stage," see Steven P. Erie, Rainbow's End (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), chap. 1-3; and Robert A. Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961), 32-62.
27. Martin Shefter, Political Parties and the State (Princeton: Princeton 1994), 7. For historical accounts on the expansion of white suffrage during the party system, see Shefter, Political Parties, chap. 3; and Richard P. McCormick, "Political Development and the Second Party System," in The American Party Systems, ed. William Nisbet Chambers and Walter Dean Burnham (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), 90-116. On the ways in which nineteenth century mass-based parties enhanced democratic behavior, see Joel H. Silbey The American Political Nation, 1838-1893 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991). On bene fits provided by the urban machine, or at least the machine in its "embryonic stage," see Steven P. Erie, Rainbow's End (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), chap. 1-3; and Robert A. Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961), 32-62.
28. Martin Shefter, Political Parties and the State (Princeton: Princeton 1994), 7. For historical accounts on the expansion of white suffrage during the party system, see Shefter, Political Parties, chap. 3; and Richard P. McCormick, "Political Development and the Second Party System," in The American Party Systems, ed. William Nisbet Chambers and Walter Dean Burnham (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), 90-116. On the ways in which nineteenth century mass-based parties enhanced democratic behavior, see Joel H. Silbey The American Political Nation, 1838-1893 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991). On bene fits provided by the urban machine, or at least the machine in its "embryonic stage," see Steven P. Erie, Rainbow's End (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), chap. 1-3; and Robert A. Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961), 32-62.
29. See V. O. Key, Southern Politics in State and Nation (New York: Knopf, 1949), chap. 14; and Richard M. Valelly, "National Parties and Racial Disenfranchisement," in Classifying by Race, ed. Paul E. Peterson (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995).
30. See V. O. Key, Southern Politics in State and Nation (New York: Knopf, 1949), chap. 14; and Richard M. Valelly, "National Parties and Racial Disenfranchisement," in Classifying by Race, ed. Paul E. Peterson (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995).
31. See Erie, Rainbow's End.
32. See Walter Dean Burnham, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York: Norton 1970).
33. For other variations of this argument, see Paul Frymer, Uneasy Alliances; Race and Parties in America (Princeton University Press, forthcoming); Ronald Walters, Black Presidential Politics in America (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988) ; and Robert Huckfeldt and Carol Kohfeld, Race and the Decline of Class in American Politics (Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1989).
34. For other variations of this argument, see Paul Frymer, Uneasy Alliances; Race and Parties in America (Princeton University Press, forthcoming); Ronald Walters, Black Presidential Politics in America (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988) ; and Robert Huckfeldt and Carol Kohfeld, Race and the Decline of Class in American Politics (Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1989).
35. For other variations of this argument, see Paul Frymer, Uneasy Alliances; Race and Parties in America (Princeton University Press, forthcoming); Ronald Walters, Black Presidential Politics in America (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988) ; and Robert Huckfeldt and Carol Kohfeld, Race and the Decline of Class in American Politics (Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1989).
36. See Philip A, Klinkner, "Bill Clinton, the 'New Orthodoxy,' and the Politics of Race in the Democratic Party," (Paper presented to the Western Political Science Association, 1995).
37. See Carmines and Stimson, Issues Evolution, 52-55; Edsall with Edsall, Chain Reaction, chap, 2-3.
38. See Carmines and Stimson, Issues Evolution, 52-55; Edsall with Edsall, Chain Reaction, chap, 2-3.
39. See Katherine Tate, From Protest to Politics: The New Black Voters in American Elections (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993).
40. As mentioned earlier, Nixon's situated position vis-à-vis a weakened but still vital liberal establishment, fits nicely within a theoretical category of presidential authority that Skowronek has labeled "preemptive politics." Skowronek argues that presidents are bound by the historical period in which they enter office; institutions, public discourse, and the president's relation to them are important in determining his political fate. Politicians such as Nixon who enter office during the "preemptive" period are limited by the political, institutional, and ideological supports that the old establishment maintains. Intruding into an ongoing polity as an alien force, they interrupt a still vital political discourse and try to preempt its agenda by playing upon the political divisions within the establishment that affiliated presidents instinctively seek to assuage. . . . Opportunities for preemption are never difficult to find, but the political terrain to be negotiated is always treacherous. These presidents will in effect be probing for reconstructive possibilities without clear warrant for breaking cleanly with the past. (Skowronek, Politics Presidents Make, 43-44).
41. Rae, Liberal Republicans. The Ripon Society found further evidence of the willingness of African-American voters to support racially progressive Republican candidates in the 1972 elections in Chicago. While strong majorities of the city's black voters supported Democrat George McGovern for president, significant portions split their tickets for progressive Republicans in both the Senate (Percy) and governor's (Ogilvie) races. See their publication, Jaws of Victory: The Game-Plan Politics of 1972, the Crisis of the Republican Party, and the Future of the Constitution (Boston: Little, Brown, 1973), 196-99.
42. Rae, Liberal Republicans. The Ripon Society found further evidence of the willingness of African-American voters to support racially progressive Republican candidates in the 1972 elections in Chicago. While strong majorities of the city's black voters supported Democrat George McGovern for president, significant portions split their tickets for progressive Republicans in both the Senate (Percy) and governor's (Ogilvie) races. See their publication, Jaws of Victory: The Game-Plan Politics of 1972, the Crisis of the Republican Party, and the Future of the Constitution (Boston: Little, Brown, 1973), 196-99.
43. Reichley, Conservative, 86.
44. Quoted in ibid., 55.
45. Quoted in ibid., 54. Moynihan and Goodwin were the authors of Lyndon Johnson's famous civil rights speech at the 1965 Howard University commencement, which compared African Americans to shackled runners in a race with whites, and for whom equal opportunity necessitated special help.
46. Nixon served as chair for a committee organized to oversee equal employment opportunity in government contracting. See Five Years of Progress: 1953-1958: A Report to President Eisenhower by the President's Committee on Government Contracts (U.S. Government Printing Office, 1958).
47. Steven E, Ambrose, Nixon: Triumph of a Politician 1962-1972 (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1989), 125.
48. See Rowland Evans, Jr. and Robert D. Novak, Nixon in the White House (New York: Random House, 1971), 137.
49. As quoted in Maurice H. Stans, "Nixon's Economic Policy Towards Minorities," in Politician, President, Administrator, ed. Leon Friedman and William F. Levantrosser (New York: Greenwood Press, 1991), 239-40.
50. In feet, some would argue that Nixon simply had no organized plan. Historian Hugh Davis Graham has called Nixon's civil rights policy "incoherent," with "no one in charge." Hugh Davis Graham, "The Incoherence of the Civil Rights Policy in the Nixon Administration," in Richard M. Nixon: Politician, President, and Administrator, eds. Leon Friedman & William F. Levantrosser (New York: Greenwood Press, 1991), 159-172. This is a characterization that might be extended to his domestic policy in general. Graham quotes an April 1969 "URGENTI" memo from chief of staff H. R. Haldeman to domestic policy adviser John Ehrlichman, which said that a frustrated Nixon "has to know what is the program, what is going down, etc." since he clearly did not know what they were doing domestically. While there were clear gestures toward winning the South, as we describe below, even administration officials had trouble discerning any plan. See The Nixon Presidency: Twenty-Two Intimate Perspectives of Richard M. Nixon, ed. Kenneth W. Thompson (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1987), 115. On civil rights policy, Nixon aide Leonard Garment candidly observed, "There was no real administration during [1969]. . . . The policy was all reactive, there was simply no strategy."
51. In feet, some would argue that Nixon simply had no organized plan. Historian Hugh Davis Graham has called Nixon's civil rights policy "incoherent," with "no one in charge." Hugh Davis Graham, "The Incoherence of the Civil Rights Policy in the Nixon Administration," in Richard M. Nixon: Politician, President, and Administrator, eds. Leon Friedman & William F. Levantrosser (New York: Greenwood Press, 1991), 159-172. This is a characterization that might be extended to his domestic policy in general. Graham quotes an April 1969 "URGENTI" memo from chief of staff H. R. Haldeman to domestic policy adviser John Ehrlichman, which said that a frustrated Nixon "has to know what is the program, what is going down, etc." since he clearly did not know what they were doing domestically. While there were clear gestures toward winning the South, as we describe below, even administration officials had trouble discerning any plan. See The Nixon Presidency: Twenty-Two Intimate Perspectives of Richard M. Nixon, ed. Kenneth W. Thompson (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1987), 115. On civil rights policy, Nixon aide Leonard Garment candidly observed, "There was no real administration during [1969]. . . . The policy was all reactive, there was simply no strategy."
52. Quoted in Michael A. Genovese, The Nixon Presidency: Power and Politics in Turbulent Times (New York: Greenwood Press, 1990), 85.
53. John Ehrlichman, "Notes of Meetings with the President," in Papers of the Nixon White House, ed. Joan Hoff-Wilson (Bethesda, MD: University Publications of America, 1989), fiche 7, 3-7-E08.2.
54. Quoted in Reichley, Conservatives, 184.
55. White House Special Files, Papers of Harry S. Dent, Box 2, Nixon Presidential Materials Project, National Archives.
56. Memo to Mr. Haldeman, Mr, Ehrlichman, and Dr. Kissinger from the President, Mar. 2, 1970, in From: The Pnsident, ed. Bruce Oudes (New York: Harper and Row, 1989), 101.
57. The amendment passed the House but did not reach the floor in the Senate.
58. See Congressional Quarterly, Nixon: The First Year of His Presidency (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1970), 49-52 for a review.
59. Reichley,Conservatives, 95.
60. Among the prominent Supreme Court cases were Alexander v. Holmes County Board of Education (1969) and Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education (1971). On the influence of liberals in Congress, see Reichley, Conservatives, chap. 9; and Gary Orfield, Congressional Power, Congress and Social Change (New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1975), chap. 9.
61. Letters were sent to Representatives Adam Clayton Powell, John Conyers, Louis Stokes, Robert Nix, Charles Diggs, Augustus Hawkins, and Shirley Chisolm from Nixon assistant Bryce N. Harlow on Apr. 11, 1969. See Hugh Graham, ed., Civil Rights During the Nixon Administration (Bethesda, MD. University Publications of America, 1989), pt. 1: The White House Central Files, reel 1, frames 0819-0942.
62. Evans and Novak, Nixon in the White House, 134.
63. Memo from Clarence L. Townes, Jr. to Republican Leaders, February 26, 1969, in Graham, Civil Rights, part I, reel 1, frame 0707.
64. Memo to Arthur Burns, Pat Moynihan, Jerris Leonard, Jim Keogh, and Attorney General Mitchell from Ken Cole, Apr. 30, 1969, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 18, frame 0499.
65. Memo to the President from Robert J. Brown, July 11,1969 in ibid., pt. 1, reel 18, frame 0729. Funding did increase at both the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department. The EEOC budget, for example, more than doubled between 1969 and 1972. Joan Hoff, Nixon Reconsidered (New York: Basic Books, 1994), 93.
66. Memo to the President from Robert J. Brown, July 11,1969 in ibid., pt. 1, reel 18, frame 0729. Funding did increase at both the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department. The EEOC budget, for example, more than doubled between 1969 and 1972. Joan Hoff, Nixon Reconsidered (New York: Basic Books, 1994), 93.
67. Memo to Staff Secretary from John Ehrlichman, Apr. 24,1969, in Graham, Civil Rights, pt. 1, reel 1, frame 0961.
68. Memo to John Ehrlichman from Robert J. Brown, May 15, 1969, in ibid., ft, 1, reel 1, frame 0938, memo to the White House Staff from Robert J. Brown, Iune 19,1969, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 2, frame 0007.
69. Memo to John Ehrlichman from Robert J. Brown, May 15, 1969, in ibid., ft, 1, reel 1, frame 0938, memo to the White House Staff from Robert J. Brown, Iune 19,1969, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 2, frame 0007.
70. Letter from John A, Volpe to the President, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 1, frames 0931-0934.
71. Notes for the President's File-(R. K. Price, Jr.), Urban Affairs Council - 13 May 1969, in Papers of the Nixon White House pt. 2, fiche 69-5-11; and Ambrose, Triumph of a Politician, 248.
72. Notes for the President's File-(R. K. Price, Jr.), Urban Affairs Council - 13 May 1969, in Papers of the Nixon White House pt. 2, fiche 69-5-11; and Ambrose, Triumph of a Politician, 248.
73. Stans, "Nixon's Economics Policy towards Minorities," in Politician, President, Adminisration, 239-46.
74. Wall Street Journal, Mar. 6, 1969.
75. Wall Street Journal, Mar. 12, 1969.
76. See U.S. Congress, Hearings, Senate Commitee on Judisiary, Equal Employment Opportunity Procedures, before Subcommitee on Administative Practice and Procedure, on S. Res. 39, Mar. 27-28, 1969.
77. William Safire, Before the Fall (New York: Doubleday, 1975), 226.
78. John David Skrentny, The Ironies of Affirmative Action: Politics, Culture and Justice in America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), chap. 7.
79. Nixon, The Memoirs of Richard Nixon (New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1978), 438.
80. Skrentny, Ironies of Affirmative Action, 198-209. Curiously, the administration were compelled to ask civil rights leaders for support in the congressional battle. See Memo for John Price from John Campbell, Dec. 22, 1969, in Graham Civil Rights, pt. 1, reel 2, frame 0266.
81. Skrentny, Ironies of Affirmative Action, 198-209. Curiously, the administration were compelled to ask civil rights leaders for support in the congressional battle. See Memo for John Price from John Campbell, Dec. 22, 1969, in Graham Civil Rights, pt. 1, reel 2, frame 0266.
82. See William B. Gould, Black Workers in White Unions: Job Discrimination in the United States (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1977).
83. AFL-CIO Statement quoted in Larry Hood, "The Nixon Administration and the Revised Philadelphia Plan for Affirmative Action: A Study in Expanding Presidential Power and Devided Government," Presidential Studies Quarterly 23 (1993): 150.
84. The generally left-leaning newspaper, however, offered no editorial support, angering the President. See memo for Alex Butterfield from John R. Brown, III, December 31, 1969, in Graham, Civil Rights, pt. 1, reel 18, frame 0837.
85. Memo for Herb Klein form John R. Brown III, December 29, 1969, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 18, frame 0828.
86. Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation (Washington, D.C,: Congressional Quarterly, 1973), 711.
87. Bayard Rustin, "The Blacks and the Unions," Harpers 248 (1971): 79.
88. Jill Quadagno, The Color of Welfare (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), chap. 3.
89. Herbert Hill, "A Critical Analysis of Apprenticeship Outreach Programs and The Hometown Plans," Howard University Institute for Urban Affairs and Research Occasional Paper 2 (1974): 75.
90. See Skrentny, lronies of Affirmative Action, chap. 2.
91. Rustin, "Blacks and the Unions," 79.
92. Charles V, Hamilton, "Blacks and Urban Affairs: Saying is Not Doing," in What Nixon is Doing to Us, ed. Alan Gartner, Colin Greer, and Frank Riessman (New York: Harper and Row, 1973), 84-93.
93. Eleanor Holmes Norton, "Civil Rights: Working Backward," in ibid. 204.
94. Memo for the President, Jan. 20,1970, in Graham, Civil Rights, pt, 1, reel 2, frame 0288.
95. Memo for the President from Dwight Chapin, Feb. 4, 1970, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 2, frame 0310.
96. Department of Justice Press Release, February 3, 1970, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 2, frames 0404-0427.
97. Memo for Dr. Moynihan from H. R. Haldeman, March 18, 1970; memo for the President from Daniel P. Moynihan, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 2, frames 0394-0398; author correspondence with David Riesman, July 1, 1994.
98. Memo to Jeb Magruder from John R. Brown III, Feb. 3, 1970, in ibid., frame 0300; memo to John R. Brown III from Jeb Magruder, Feb. 16, 1970, in ibid., frame O344.
99. Memo to Jeb Magruder from John R. Brown III, Feb. 3, 1970, in ibid., frame 0300; memo to John R. Brown III from Jeb Magruder, Feb. 16, 1970, in ibid., frame O344.
100. Memo for the President, March 15, 1970, in ibid., frame 0371.
101. Memo to John Ehrlichman from Harry Dent, May 14,1970, White House Special Files, Staff Member and Office Files, Papers of Harry S. Dent, box 3, folder: Memos to Ehrlichman, Nixon Presidential Materials Project, National Archives.
102. "Report; Blacks," to Bryce Harlow from Lamar Alexander, June 17, 1970, in Graham, Civil Rights, frame 0765.
103. Memo for Robert Brown, John Ehrlichman, Leonard Garment, and Robert Finch from Dwight Chapin, July 25, 1970, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 2, frame 0866.
104. Memo for Hugh Sloan from Peter Flanigan, September 11,1970, in ibid., pt 1, reel 2, frame 0995.
105. Quadagno, Color of Welfare, chap. 3.
106. Nixon apparently saw the link, however, between mainstream America and Mack politics. As related to Harry Dent from Ken Cole, Nixon stated that "we keep talking to the minorities (urged on by the establishment) and overlook our greatest potential." See the memos from Ken Cole to Harry Dent, Oct. 6, 1969; and from Richard P. Nathan to Harry Cashen, Nov. 3, 1969, White House Special Files, Staff Member and Office Files, Papers of Harry S. Dent, box 8, folder: Middle America [1 of 2], Nixon Presidential Materials Project, National Archieves.
107. Haldeman, Haldeman Diaries, 117-18.
108. Ibid., 126.
109. Ibid., 145.
110. Michael P. Balzano, Jr., "The Silent v. the New Majority," in Politician, President, Administrator, 264.
111. Ambrose, Triumph of a Politician, 359.
112. Herbert S. Parmet, Richard Nixon and His America (Boston: Little, Brown, 1990), 602.
113. Haldeman, Haldeman Diaries, 84.
114. John R. Brown III memo to Mr. Ehrlichman, Mr. Finch, and Mr. Haldeman, in Oudes, Ibid, Sept. 8,1970, 156-57. It was on Sept. 5 that Nixon told his staff that he no longer wished to meet with black leaders.
115. Bureaucrats in the Office of Federal Contract Compliance actually expanded Philadelphia Plan-style affirmative action in other, non-construction government contracts (Order No. 4), though we are not aware of any evidence that this was discussed in the administration, or indeed that Nixon was even aware of it. Order No. 4 was not used in the 1972 campaign to attract black or white liberal voters.
116. Safire, Before the Fall, 585.
117. Leon Panetta and Peter Gall, Bring Us Together (Philadelphia; J. B. Lippincott, 1971), 370.
118. John Ehrlichman, Witness to Power (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1982), 222.
119. Memo to Mr. Colson from H. R. Haldeman, Sept. 8, 1970, quoted in Oudes, From: The President, 158.
120. Memo to H. R. Haldeman from Charles Colson, Sept 14, 1970, White House Special Files, Subject Files: Confidential Files, 1969-1974, box 38, folder: Labor-Management Relations [1969-1970], Nixon Presidential Materials Project, National Archives.
121. Memo to Henry Cashen from Charles W. Colson, quoted in Oudes, From: The President, 162.
122. Safire, Before the Fall, 320.
123. Riechley, Conservatives, 209-10,217. On Feb. 28,1971, Nixon finally did suspend Davis Bacon -but later reinstated the law on Mar. 29.
124. Letter from Barry Goldwater to Bryce Harlow, Jan. 6, 1969, in Graham, Civil Rights, pt 1, reel 1, frame 0021.
125. Letter from John J. Rhodes (R-AZ), to Peter M. Flanigan, June 17, 1969, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 2, frame 0004.
126. See "The Chicano Strategy': Boon for Republicans?" Congressional Quarterly Weekly 30 (1972): 534.
127. Memo from H. R. Haldeman to Mr. Harry Dent, October 31, 1969, in Graham, Civil Rights, pt. 1, reel 2, frame 0219.
128. Press Release, Nov. 5, 1970, White House Special Files, Staff Member and Office Files, Papers of Harry S. Dent, box 13, folder: "Cabinet Committee on opportunities for the Spanish-speaking," Nixon Presidential Materials Project, National Archives.
129. Memo for Clark MacGregor and George Shultz from George Grassmuck; Memo for Clark MacGregor from William Timmons, May 12, 1971, in Graham, Civil Rights, pt. 1, reel 3, frame 871-873.
130. See Richard Santillan and Frederico A. Subervi-Velez, "Latino Participation in Republican Party Politics in California," in Racial and Ethnic Politics in California, ed. Byran O. Jackson and Michael B. Preston (Berkeley; IGS Press, 1991), 296-97.
131. Memo from George Grasssmuck to Ken Smith, July 30, 1971, and attachment, in White House Special Files, Staff Member and Office Files, Papers of Robert Finch, box 16, Nixon Presidential Materials Project, National Archives.
132. Memo from George Shultz to The President, Sept, 17, 1971; Memo from Maurice Stans to John Ehrlichman, Sept. 16, 1971, in Hoff-Wilson, Papers of the Nixon White House, pt. 6, fiche 173, frames 32-52.
133. See Ripon Society, Jaws of Victory, 79.
134. Special Memorandum for the President, Aug. 25, 1970, in Hoff-Wilson, Papers of the Nixon White House, pt. 6, fiche 92, frames 42-43.
135. Memo from Charles W. Colson to John Ehrlichman, Dec. 20, 1971 and attached report, in Graham, Civil Rights, pt. 1, reel 3, frames 0899-0952. See also memo from Ken Cole to Ed Morgan, Jan. 10, 1972, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 3, frames 0896-0897.
136. Memo from Charles W. Colson to John Ehrlichman, Dec. 20, 1971 and attached report, in Graham, Civil Rights, pt. 1, reel 3, frames 0899-0952. See also memo from Ken Cole to Ed Morgan, Jan. 10, 1972, in ibid., pt. 1, reel 3, frames 0896-0897.
137. Memo from George Shultz to The President, Sept. 17, 1971; Memo from Maurice Stans to John Ehrlichman, Sept. 16, 1971, in Hoff-Wilson, Papers of the Nixon White House, pt. 6, fiche 173, frames 32-52.
138. See memo from Charles W. Colson to John Ehrlichman, Dec. 20, 1971, and attached report, in Graham, Civil Rights, pt. 1, reel 3, frames 0899-0952.