The conclusion that the original purpose of including faculty desegregation was not affected by the addition of section 604 is further strengthened by portions of the legislative history emphasizing that the added section was not intended to affect the substance of section 601. For instance, Senator Humphrey, in introducing the Dirksen-Mansfield substitute, which added section 604, said that "[t]his provision is in line with the provisions of section 602 and serves to spell out more precisely the declared scope of coverage of the title." In the same speech he stated (110 C.R. 12714):

"We have made no changes of substance in Title VI. We have made several minor adjustment and, in addition, we have modified the language to make explicit the declared intention of this title."

The fact that the language of section 604 is worded broadly enough to reach all employment discrimination does not justify defeating the basic and overriding purpose of Title VI. The ordinary rule of statutory construction is that exceptions or exemptions in a statute should be narrowly construed so as not to defeat the primary purpose of a statute. United States v. McElvain, 272 U.S. 633, 639 (1926); Spokane & Inland Empire R. Co. v. United States, 241 U.S. 344, 350 (1916); Korherr v. Bumb, 262 F. 2d 157, 162 (C.A. 9, 1958).

For the foregoing reasons we conclude that section 601 applies to the desegregation of faculty and staff of school systems that have been racially segregated and that section 604 does not preclude such application. Sincerely,

RAMSEY CLARK, Deputy Attorney General.

(7) Is OE engaging either directly or indirectly in the prohibited practice of busing students from one school to another in order to effect or accelerate racial integration?

Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 specifically states that desegregation "shall not mean the assignment of students to public schools in order to overcome racial imbalance." The U.S. Office of Education has engaged in no practice or effort to contravene the spirit or law of this Congressional directive. Nevertheless, a great deal of confusion often arises concerning this point because of actions that may be taken independently by local school systems.

Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, most school districts operating segregated schools (dual schools) for Negro and white students arbitrarily assigned white children to the nearest white schools, which might be miles beyond a Negro school, and vice versa. In effect, this meant that students were bused beyond their home neighborhoods to attend segregated schools.

The guidelines specifically state with regard to school transportation that dual or segregated transportation systems and any other forms of discrimination must be eliminated. Routing and scheduling of transportation must be planned on the basis of such factors as economy and efficiency, and may not operate to impede desegregation. Routes and schedules must be changed to the extent necessary to comply with this provision."

To assist school systems make satisfactory desegregation progress so they can continue to be eligible for Federal funds, our staff members sometimes suggest administrative changes, which may involve changes in bus routes.

In no instance, however, has the Office of Education recommended busing students from one school to another to bring about "racial balance." Our efforts have been devoted solely to the elimination of illegal, segregated school systems. Another source of possible confusion is the fact that the Office of Education makes money available, on request, to local school districts for research and experimental work to help them improve the quality of education for their children. Some districts have requested funds from the Office of Education to look into the feasibility of busing children to and from neighboring districts as a means of affording equal educational opportunities. Where such busing has occurred, it has been planned and initiated by local school authorities, and none of it is funded under the Civil Rights Act, which contains the prohibition against busing.

APPENDIX III

Letter of Harold Howe II, U.S. Commissioner of Education, of December 30, 1966, to Hon. Byron G. Rogers, chairman, Special Subcommittee on Civil Rights. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,

OFFICE OF EDUCATION,

Hon. BYRON G. ROGERS,

Washington, D.C., December 30, 1966.

Chairman, Subcommittee on Civil Rights,

Committee on the Judiciary,

House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. ROGERS: In view of the responsibilities of your committee in reviewing the civil rights compliance activities of the Office of Education, I wish to inform you of the action we are taking with regard to the school desegregation requirements for next year.

School officials are understandably anxious to learn at the earliest possible date of any changes that would affect their plans for next year so that they can make plans and preparations during this school year. It is most desirable from our point of view, as well as theirs, that they be given as much advance notice as possible.

We believe that the basic principles of the guidelines issued in March 1966 will continue to serve the purposes of implementing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act for the school year 1967-68. Since we do not contemplate any changes, we feel it is important to inform the school districts of this decision at this time. Reprints of the guidelines with the dates changed appropriately, but with virtually no other changes, are being mailed to the districts operating under voluntary desegregation plans and the State departments of education. I am enclosing copies of these documents for the information of your committee. If you have any questions concerning the materials, I shall be glad to discuss them at your convenience.

DEAR SUPERINTENDENT MEADOWS: I am enclosing a copy of a letter I am sending to the local school districts in your State which operate under voluntary desegregation plans. The letter transmits and explains the updated desegregation guidelines for the school year 1967-68. They are virtually unchanged from those issued in March 1966.

If there is any way in which we can be of help to you or the school districts in your State in preparing for further steps in desegregation for the coming year, please call upon us.

Sincerely yours,

HAROLD HOWE II,
U.S. Commissioner of Education.

NOTE.-Identical letter sent to all Chief State School Officers in the 17 Southern and Border States-Ala., Ark., Fla., Ga., La., Miss., N.C., S.C., Tenn., Texas, Va., Md., Del., Ky., Mo., W.Va., and Okla.

72-403 0-67 -25

A91

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
OFFICE OF EDUCATION,
Washington, D.C., December 30, 1966.

Identical letter attached sent to all chief State School Officers in 17 Southern and Border States

NOTE. This note typed at the bottom of the ltr. to the CSSO in Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, and West Virginia

In the case of your State, we are sending a supply of the guidelines to your office rather than to the local school superintendents. Since many school districts are no longer operating under free choice plans, we would like to discuss with you the most useful approach in working with the districts in regard to their plans for next year.

HAROLD HOWE II,

U.S. Commissioner of Education.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,

OFFICE OF EDUCATION, Washington, D.C., January, 1967.

Memorandum for Superintendents and Boards of Education of School Systems Qualifying for Federal Financial Assistance Under Voluntary Plans for Desegregation.

I enclose copies of the school desegregation guidelines as brought up to date for the school year 1967-68. The guidelines are virtually unchanged from those issued in March 1966.

We are issuing these guidelines now to give school officials as much time as possible to prepare for the coming school year.

The only substantive change is to permit the 30-day choice period in free choice plans to start as early as January 1.

We hope that the earlier choice period will give free choice districts greater time to adjust to changed enrollment patterns, and, if necessary, to take additional steps before the summer vacation to achieve adequate progress in desegregation.

Those districts which filed Form 441-B this past year need not refile. Any district not intending to comply with the guidelines should so notify the Office of Education.

The most important requirement in remaining eligible for Federal assistance is to make further progress in 1967-68 in eliminating the dual school system, in regard to both students and faculty. Experience has shown that the most important factor in making continued progress in school desegregation is local initiative. As pointed out on page three of the guidelines, school officials "are responsible for preparing students, teachers and all other personnel, and the community in general for the successful desegregation of the school system." All other sections in the guidelines should be read in the light of this principle. Section 181.52 should not be read as precluding efforts by school officials or community leaders to alleviate fears or concerns parents may have about sending their children to another school. The need for community preparation is especially important for those school districts holding a choice period during the winter or early spring.

One other clarification of the guidelines may be useful: The desegregation notice in the press, even if published prominently, may be considered by some papers as a legal notice and so labeled. There is no objection to this so long as the notice is published on a page having general news rather than among the “fine print” legal notices. Please let us know if there is anything we can do to assist you in carrying out your plan.

HAROLD HOWE II,

U.S. Commissioner of Education.

REVISED STATEMENT OF POLICIES

FOR SCHOOL DESEGREGATION PLANS UNDER TITLE VI OF THE

CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964

December 1966

As Amended for the School Year 1967-68

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Office of Education

Revised Statement of Policies for School Desegregation Plans Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

(As Amended for the School Year 1967-68)

Subpart A-Applicability of This Statement of Policies