00:00:02.340 - 00:00:28.360

has to George Pizza Night rolling. I was just going to get a voice level. Scene one. Take 1, 40 73 Smathers On this week's report to The People of Florida by Senator George Smathers, we present an informal interview on matters of particular interest to Florida. Now let's join the discussion, Senator, you southerly Satisfied with the bill that's been reported out of the Judiciary Committee?

00:00:29.140 - 00:00:50.620

We think it's a vastly improved bill over the way it started out. The original Dirksen, billed as such was a very bad bill. It had very little to do with voting rights. It had a lot to do with that punitive measures. And I think by virtue of the filibuster which we conducted, we were able to educate the people of the nation, finally depressed.

00:00:50.620 - 00:01:04.780

And that was very hard to do to the fact that there was in the original so called civil rights bill many many items which were very punitive in nature, in which would have been very bad, not only for the Southwest, for the rest of the nation as well.

00:01:04.780 - 00:01:22.990

So we have one that particular fighting being specific. Senator the bill, as it now is on the floor of the Senate. What happens in regards to the referees? Well, undoubtedly, a bill will be passed. Yeah, there there is. No, there are only 18 Southerners, and the bill is going to be passed.

00:01:22.990 - 00:01:44.360

But frankly, we've got it down to a voting rights provisions. And, of course, the heart of the voting rights provision is that there will be these referees who will, in fact have the right to listen to a complainant who says that he's being deprived of his right to vote and report that to the federal judge and be given them by the federal judge in the referee.

00:01:44.360 - 00:02:08.330

The right to vote. I don't believe that anybody thinks that we can take that out of the bill, because that's in there. And obviously there's a majority of the senators who want that to remain in one of the point in that same question, senator, keep offer had an amendment that would allow the state officials to be present at the time this man was interviewed so that they could make it a matter of record for a jury trial or something, you know that remain in that will remain in it.

00:02:08.340 - 00:02:29.400

or to remain in. We should never provide in this nation. They set up where you have only X party proceeding. That is where you have only one side. I thought it was a splendid amendment. The Judiciary Committee voted it in. By the time this particular telecast is saying, we will know that the Senate has not yet voted as a body as to whether they will keep it in or not.

00:02:29.410 - 00:03:08.060

I hope they'll keep it in Senator, what about this amendment regarding obstruction of court for this? Well, again, we've made a vast improvement in that. As you know, when we started out this penalty for the obstruction of court orders applied only to the obstruction of ordered with respect to school desegregation, we have now made it applied to the instruction of any federal court order as it ought to be, so that from now on we will see that if there somebody refusing to follow a court order with respect to a labor decision case, why that would be considered worthy of a penalty and punished.

00:03:08.540 - 00:03:25.660

And we have made this now apply all the way across the board. And I'm delighted to say that every man, most every member of the Senate voted for that, which was fair. We have added fairness and clearness to this bill. Another point that showed up. The definite approach against the South was this question about bombing a school.

00:03:25.730 - 00:03:40.360

Now you've changed that. So it's bombing almost anything of a public nature, haven't you? Originally, that's right. Originated the bill provided that it was a crime to carry explosives across the state line or to use anything in connection with the bombing of a school or a church.

00:03:40.840 - 00:04:08.600

Well, obviously we talked about that. It was a man's civil rights to be free from the fear of bombing, even in his own home or his own business establishment or anything else. So now, while we continue to make it a crime to bomb any school or church, we nevertheless have broadened the law so that now applicable all the way across the boy, uh, to the bombing of any kind of a home of business or any other kind of establishment, which is what the law to be the law already always be fair and applicable to everyone.

00:04:08.690 - 00:04:30.960

Senator, you've said that we have enough federal law on the books today to ensure voting privileges for anyone who wants to vote. Would you give me an example of just how a law like that? The laws we have today could work well, very briefly. The 1957 law which authorized the attorney General to move into any area of the country, any county, wherever a complaint was filed to him that somebody was not being permitted to vote.

00:04:31.540 - 00:04:45.160

That law is still on the books. And actually, that law could still be put into effect if the Attorney General wanted to. How are you going to vote very quickly on this bill? Any laws on the books? Even though I would vote against this bill as it in its present form?