Message to the Senate
Returning Without Approval the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 and
Transmitting Alternative Legislation
To
the Senate of the
I
am returning unsigned with my objections S. 557 and transmitting for your
prompt consideration the Civil Rights Protection Act of 1988. The Congress
should enact legislation designed to eliminate invidious discrimination and to
ensure equality of opportunity for all Americans while preserving their basic
freedoms from governmental interference and control. Regrettably, the bill
presented to me fails to achieve that objective.
There
is no matter of greater concern to me than ensuring that our Nation is free of
discrimination. Our country has paid a heavy price in the past for prejudices,
whether based upon race, gender, ethnic background, religion or handicap. Such
attitudes have no place in our society.
It
was with this commitment in mind that in the wake of the Supreme Court's 1984
Our
bill advances the protection of civil rights. It would:
-- prohibit discrimination against women,
minorities, persons with disabilities, and the elderly across the board in
public school districts, public systems of higher education, systems of
vocational education, and private educational institutions which receive any
Federal aid.
-- extend the application of the civil rights
statutes to entire businesses which receive Federal aid as a whole and to the
entire plant or facility receiving Federal aid in every other instance.
-- prohibit discrimination in all of the
federally funded programs of departments and agencies of State and local
governments.
Our
bill complements well our body of existing Federal civil rights laws. But even
more remains to be done. For example, I have urged the Congress to enact
responsible legislation to deal with some obvious failures of the Fair Housing
Act of 1968, including the need to protect persons with disabilities.
Congress,
on the other hand, has sent me a bill that would vastly and unjustifiably
expand the power of the Federal government over the decisions and affairs of
private organizations, such as churches and synagogues, farms, businesses, and
State and local governments. In the process, it would place at risk such cherished
values as religious liberty.
The
bill presented to me would diminish substantially the freedom and independence
of religious institutions in our society. The bill would seriously impinge upon
religious liberty because of its unprecedented and pervasive coverage of
churches and synagogues based on receipt of even a small amount of Federal aid
for just one activity; its unprecedented coverage of entire religious
elementary and secondary school systems when only a single school in such a
system receives Federal aid; and its failure to protect, under Title IX of the
Education Amendments of 1972, the religious freedom of private schools that are
closely identified with the religious tenets of, but not controlled by, a
religious organization.
Businesses
participating in Federal programs, such as job training programs, would be
subject to comprehensive Federal regulation. While some proponents of S. 557
have claimed that it would not apply to farmers who receive Federal crop
subsidies or food suppliers who accept food stamps, the ambiguity in the
statute and its legislative history indicates that these exemptions should be
made explicit.
A
significant portion of the private sector -- entities principally engaged in
the business of providing education, health care, housing, social services, or
parks and recreation -- would for the first time be covered nationwide in all
of their activities, including those wholly unrelated activities of their
subsidiaries or other divisions, even if those subsidiaries or divisions
receive no Federal aid. Again, there was no demonstrated need for such sweeping
coverage.
Further,
this bill would be beyond pre-Grove City law and expand the scope of coverage
of State and local government agencies. Under S. 557, any agency of such a
government that receives or distributes such assistance would be subject in all
of its operations to a wide-ranging regime of Federal regulation, contrary to
the sound principles of federalism.
The
cost and burdens of compliance with S. 557 would be substantial. The bill would
bring to those it covers -- which is most of
Moreover,
such legislation would likely have the unintended consequences of harming many
of the same people it is supposed to protect. For example, persons with
disabilities seeking to enhance their job skills are not helped if businesses withdraw
from Federal job-training programs because of their unwillingness to accept
vastly expanded bureaucratic intrusions under S. 557. Business groups have
indicated many of their members may do just that.
The
Civil Rights Protection Act that I am proposing today addresses the many
shortcomings of S. 557. The Civil Rights Protection Act would protect civil
rights and at the same time preserve the independence of State and local
governments, the freedom of religion, and the right of
The
Civil Rights Protection Act contains important changes from S. 557 designed to
avoid unnecessary Federal intrusion into the lives and businesses of Americans,
while ensuring that Federal aid is properly monitored under the civil rights
statutes it amends. The bill would:
-- Protect religious liberty by limiting
coverage to that part of a church or synagogue which participates in a Federal
program; by protecting under Title IX, the religious tenets of private
institutions closely identified with religious organizations on the same basis
as institutions directly controlled by religious organizations; and by
providing that when a religious secondary or elementary school receives Federal
assistance, only that school, and not the entire religious school system,
becomes subject to the Federal regulation.
-- Ensure that the reach of Federal regulation
into private businesses extends only to the facility that participates in Federally funded programs, unless the business, as a whole,
receives Federal aid, in which case it is covered in its entirety. The bill
also states explicitly that farmers will not become subject to Federal
regulation by virtue of their acceptance of Federal price support payments, and
that grocers and supermarkets will not become subject
to such regulations by virtue of accepting food stamps from customers.
-- Preserve the independence of State and
local government from Federal control by limiting Federal regulation to the
part of a State or local entity that receives or distributes Federal
assistance.
In
all other respects, my proposal is identical to S. 557, including the
provisions to ensure that this legislation does not impair protection for the
lives of unborn children.
I
urge that upon reconsidering S. 557 in light of my objections, you reject the
bill and enact promptly in its place the Civil Rights Protection Act of 1988.
Ronald
Reagan
The
White House,
Note: S. 557, which
passed over the President's veto on March 22, was assigned Public Law No. 100 -
259.