For the class that I teach on American statesmanship, we study the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and consider the consequential, but very different, contributions of two iconic U.S. senators from Illinois, Democrat Paul Douglas and Republican Everett Dirksen.
Douglas and Dirksen were nearly complete opposites — in background, education, temperament, cast of mind, political philosophy and legislative style. Examining them in tandem provides important insights into statesmanship, which is essential for confronting the challenges facing our communities, country and world.
The senatorial careers of these two statesmen illustrate — and clarify — the distinct contributions of intellectuals, purists and thought leaders on one hand and pragmatists, consensus builders and dealmakers on the other.
Douglas was born in Massachusetts and raised in Maine. Chicago, however, became his personal, professional and political home. He taught economics at the University of Chicago and was active in the city’s progressive politics, serving on the City Council from 1939 to 1942.
Serious, even stern, Douglas was highly principled, fiercely uncompromising and personally brave. At the age of 50 and as the father of four children, Douglas joined the Marines shortly after Pearl Harbor. He was badly injured in the war in the South Pacific and returned home with two Purple Hearts, a Bronze Star and a shattered left arm.
First elected to the U.S. Senate in 1948, Douglas was ahead of his time on consumer rights, health care for the elderly, environmental protections, governmental ethics and civil rights — which was his enduring passion. He began pushing for reform in this area from the day he entered the upper chamber, giving frequent speeches, introducing comprehensive legislation and trying to change Senate filibuster rules that were preventing movement on civil rights.
Douglas was often a loner and had tense relationships, even with like-minded colleagues. He embraced the role of the legislator as teacher, arguing in his memoirs that “long periods of public education are needed” before contentious issues are ready for constructive action. He suffered frequent failures and could be intensely self-critical. “Let’s pretend I’m a senator,” he muttered to an aide after he had been outmaneuvered on a civil rights bill.
But Douglas never quit fighting. “Even if every battle was unsuccessful,” he declared, “constant but peaceful struggle would hasten the ultimate coming of needed reforms.”
Dirksen was a conservative Republican from downstate Illinois. He loved politics, sports, theater and his hometown of Pekin. As a young man, he volunteered to fight in World War I and served as an artillery spotter in a hydrogen-filled balloon tethered 3,500 feet above the French battlefield. He self-deprecatingly called himself a “gas-bag man.”
Dirksen made it back to earth and returned home. He joined the family’s bakery business with his brothers and won a seat on Pekin’s City Council. Elected to the U.S. House in 1932, he served for eight terms. Dirksen was elected to the Senate in 1950, defeating Scott Lucas, the incumbent Democrat and Senate majority leader. Dirksen rose steadily up the Senate Republican leadership ranks, becoming the GOP leader in 1959.
Flamboyant and fun, Dirksen was also shrewd, hardworking and tough-minded. A New York Times correspondent described him as a “remarkable political phenomenon.” He was a strikingly creative and resourceful legislator with a lacerating wit. During a testy exchange with Democratic Sen. Thomas Dodd of Connecticut, Dirksen referred to Dodd as “the great crusader from the Nutmeg State” who suffered from “cerebral incoherence.”
Douglas and Dirksen both played significant roles in the passage of the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act. Douglas’ greatest contribution was keeping the issue alive through the 1950s and early ’60s, educating the public, and framing civil rights as an urgent moral imperative. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. called him “the greatest of senators.”
Dirksen was the central congressional figure in enacting the legislation. He spent months drafting the bill and crafting amendments to break the 60-working-day filibuster led by conservative Southern Democrats.
He closed the Senate debate with a sentiment borrowed from French writer Victor Hugo: “There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world; and that is an idea whose time has come.”
Dirksen ultimately assembled a bill that ended the filibuster by a vote of 71 to 29. He garnered the support of 44 Democrats and 27 of the 33 Republicans, demonstrating uncommon legislative skill. The final package was referred to as Dirksen’s bill.
“It was truly ironic,” historian Edward Schapsmeier wrote, “that whereas Douglas was one of the most vocal and courageous advocates for civil rights in the postwar period, it was Dirksen who played the vital, if not key, role in breaking the southern filibusters that threatened the passage of the 1964 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts.”
Both the principled zealotry of Douglas and the compromise-forging acumen of Dirksen are urgently needed if our communities and country will successfully tackle the formidable challenges that confront us.
Let’s honor the statesmanship of these two senators, appreciate their differences, and allow them to inspire and guide us.
John T. Shaw is director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute. Shaw’s columns, exclusive to the Tribune, appear the last Monday of each month. His most recent book is “The Education of a Statesman: How Global Leaders Can Repair a Fractured World.”
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
