Could JFK have got the Civil Rights Act passed in 1964

In OTL Johnson used Kennedy as a symbol in pressing for the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Althogh the Congressional majority was large to pass the law it was necassary to get two thirds to defeat a filibuster. It was not carried by all that much more than 2 thirds in the Senate.

If the Bill was effectively blocked what would subsequent poltiics be like?
 
IOTL Martin Luther King forced a reluctant LBJ to push it as hard as he could—LBJ didn't think it would pass, but he had skills so it did.

In an ATL Kennedy Lives scenario Civil Rights does not get passed. It wasn't a top priority of Kennedy, and as you said the Senate would block it.

However some form of civil rights is pretty certain to get passed, albeit watered down compared to OTL.


The effects? I'm not sure. It's possible the growing chaos gets speeded up, but one thing to note is white resentment. IOTL the "silent majority" figured that passing civil rights was enough, and why the hell were the blacks trying to burn down the cities. It's one of the reasons "law and order" Nixon played so well, and same with Wallace.

In the ATL weak civil rights may alter those views somewhat, which—I would wager—would result in positive effects…*eventually.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Kennedy would not have gotten the bill through. Only LBJ, the master politician, had the skills to achieve it.

I have always thought it rather unfortunate that civil rights and the Apollo program, both of which should rightly be seen as achievements of LBJ, are most often attributed to Kennedy.
 
Kennedy would not have gotten the bill through. Only LBJ, the master politician, had the skills to achieve it.

I have always thought it rather unfortunate that civil rights and the Apollo program, both of which should rightly be seen as achievements of LBJ, are most often attributed to Kennedy.

I think Kennedy would have passed something, but it wouldn't have been OTL Civil Rights.

Agreed. LBJ gets stuck with Viet Nam which outweighs all the good (and bad—I'm not fond of most of the Great Society) he did. Basically Democrats take everything they like from the JFK-LBJ Presidencies and give it to JFK, and then everything they don't like gets shoved onto LBJ.
 
Bump.

On further reading it does appear that Kennedy was gearing up to pass Civil Rights (although the Voting Rights Act would be delayed).

Under this case it comes down to 1964. IOTL Johnson brought it in with him enough liberal Democrats to pass it, so if we want Kennedy to pass it he needs a similar sized landslide against Goldwater.


(Incidentally it's also quite possible that Kennedy would have cancelled Apollo, especially if the USSR—which didn't believe the USA was serious about Apollo—ended their moon plans in 1964. By 1963 it was becoming apparent just how much the program was going to cost, and if the Soviets weren't going to the moon I doubt Kennedy would bother. That might actually be good for the space program if some reasonable fraction of Apollo's resources is instead focused on building a permanent near-Earth presence.)
 
In OTL Johnson used Kennedy as a symbol in pressing for the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Althogh the Congressional majority was large to pass the law it was necassary to get two thirds to defeat a filibuster. It was not carried by all that much more than 2 thirds in the Senate.

If the Bill was effectively blocked what would subsequent poltiics be like?
I don't think he would have had enough votes to get it passed in 64-though he sure would have tried. I think starting in spring of 1965 he would certainly been able to get it passed in wake of the Civil Rights march in Selma.
 
Bump.

On further reading it does appear that Kennedy was gearing up to pass Civil Rights (although the Voting Rights Act would be delayed).

Under this case it comes down to 1964. IOTL Johnson brought it in with him enough liberal Democrats to pass it, so if we want Kennedy to pass it he needs a similar sized landslide against Goldwater.


(Incidentally it's also quite possible that Kennedy would have cancelled Apollo, especially if the USSR—which didn't believe the USA was serious about Apollo—ended their moon plans in 1964. By 1963 it was becoming apparent just how much the program was going to cost, and if the Soviets weren't going to the moon I doubt Kennedy would bother. That might actually be good for the space program if some reasonable fraction of Apollo's resources is instead focused on building a permanent near-Earth presence.)

Neither Johnson nor Kennedy would have been able to pass the CRA-65 without the GOP. In 65 there was 67 Democrats and 33 GOP Senators, as 21 of the Dems were from the South they only needed 13 other Senators to block the bill from being voted on*. As it happens 22 Dems and 6 GOP Senators voted no. All 22 " Southern Senators" ( 21 Dem,1 GOP ) voted no.
One other Democrat voted no, He is still a Senator as a matter of fact he is Third in line to replace the President, and unlike many of the other no voting Senators stayed a Democrat.

* In 65 Fillibusters required two-thirds (67 Senators) of the Senate to be end them, it is now 60 Senators.
 
Neither Johnson nor Kennedy would have been able to pass the CRA-65 without the GOP. In 65 there was 67 Democrats and 33 GOP Senators, as 21 of the Dems were from the South they only needed 13 other Senators to block the bill from being voted on*. As it happens 22 Dems and 6 GOP Senators voted no. All 22 " Southern Senators" ( 21 Dem,1 GOP ) voted no.
One other Democrat voted no, He is still a Senator as a matter of fact he is Third in line to replace the President, and unlike many of the other no voting Senators stayed a Democrat.

* In 65 Fillibusters required two-thirds (67 Senators) of the Senate to be end them, it is now 60 Senators.


I was talking about the House in terms of a landslide victory (i.e. liberal Republicans + non-Southern Democrats vs. Southern Democrats + conservative Republicans) and how many liberal representatives JFK would need.

In the Senate, of course, as you point out there was a very narrow passage. If JFK gets close to Johnson's landslide victory (not unreasonable, especially if Goldwater does badly in the weekly debate series) than he can probably get past the Senate as well.
 

maverick

Banned
I've always been of the impression that Kennedy deliberately avoided making big polices and legislation until he had assured himself a second term...

If he gets pressured, we might see a less-powerful, wattered down version of IOTL 1964 Civil rights acts, with a more meaningful one and the Voting rights act in '65 or '67...
 
I've always been of the impression that Kennedy deliberately avoided making big polices and legislation until he had assured himself a second term...

If he gets pressured, we might see a less-powerful, wattered down version of IOTL 1964 Civil rights acts, with a more meaningful one and the Voting rights act in '65 or '67...


Think of it like: Johnson basically took whatever he thought Kennedy wanted and ran with it. On some things—Civil Rights, the War on Poverty—he was probably right, and other things—Viet Nam—he was probably wrong.

So a second Kennedy term would look a lot like OTL's Johnson term, a little watered down, with a later Voting Rights Act, probably a pull-out of Viet Nam, and perhaps Apollo cancelation (or at least ending the moon shot)—but otherwise quite similar.
 
So a second Kennedy term would look a lot like OTL's Johnson term, a little watered down, with a later Voting Rights Act, probably a pull-out of Viet Nam, and perhaps Apollo cancelation (or at least ending the moon shot)—but otherwise quite similar.
The whole point of Apollo was to go to the moon. Surely?

"...we choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard..." etc.
 
The whole point of Apollo was to go to the moon. Surely?

"...we choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard..." etc.

True, but the Saturn V rocket at least is useful for all sorts of things.

I'm sure someone on the board can break down NASA's budget (and I'd guess the Saturn V would be a very big part of it) but whereas the moon shot was just the latest in a pathetic series of stunts and one-upmanship the Saturn V rocket re-tasked to lifting up a permanent near-Earth space presence is incredibly useful.
 
Top