Bettmann/Corbis [1]
On January 8, 1964, Lyndon B. Johnson announced a program that would become known as the War on Poverty. In his presidential address to Congress, Johnson highlighted that poverty was a significant problem within the United States, one that need to be confronted across racial and spatial lines,
“But whatever the cause, our joint Federal-local effort must pursue poverty, pursue it wherever it exists–in city slums and small towns, in sharecropper shacks or migrant worker camps, on Indian Reservations, among whites as well as Negroes, among the young as well as the aged, in the boom towns and in the depressed areas.” [2]
Johnson, who originally hailed from Texas, had significant experience in what this poverty looked like at the ground level. In his Special Message to Congress in 1965, Lyndon B. Johnson recounted his memories from his first job after college, as a teacher in a small town in South Texas at a Mexican-American school,
“Few of them could speak English, and I couldn’t speak much Spanish. My students were poor and they often came to class without breakfast, hungry. They knew even in their youth the pain of prejudice. They never seemed to know why people disliked them. But they knew it was so, because I saw it in their eyes. I often walked home late in the afternoon, after the classes were finished, wishing there was more that I could do. But all I knew was to teach them the little that I knew, hoping that it might help them against the hardships that lay ahead.
Somehow you never forget what poverty and hatred can do when you see its scars on the hopeful face of a young child.”[3]
In a speech that went on to address racial inequality, voting rights, and the War on Poverty, Johnson highlighted inequalities across the United States, ones that he fully planned to change. For President Johnson, these racial and economic inequalities were deeply personal and local.
Waco, Texas is another site of the personal and local impacts of the War on Poverty in Texas and a space of economic and racial boundaries. W. R. Poage served as the Representative for the 11th Congressional District in Texas from 1937 to 1978, and this region contained McLennan County throughout his time in office. In Poage’s papers housed at the Baylor Collections of Political Materials, numerous constituents wrote to Poage to express their position on War on Poverty policies.
Poage’s papers demonstrate public positions on the impact and influence of the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) on local issues. As Poage and his constituents navigated their contexts of poverty, economics, race, the Cold War and Youth Anxieties, the intentions and outcomes of the OEO looked different for different people. The stories revealed in this correspondence demonstrate the range of constituent perspectives on the impact of the War on Poverty at a political and local level in Waco, Texas.
The Texas Collection [4]
Numerous constituents in Waco reached out to Representative Poage, thanking him for the work OEO and Community Action Program (CAP) had done to support them and their communities.[5] For these constituents, the War on Poverty wasn’t a racial or political conversation. Instead, it offered economic opportunities that benefitted and supported their community by creating jobs and access to social services.
With programs like Head Start, Job Corps, VISTA, Neighborhood Youth Corps, College Work Study, Work Experience, Adult basic education, and Community action programs, the OEO targeted numerous levels of poverty from a national level and in deeply community rooted programs. [6]
Congressman Poage saved newspaper clippings that tell stories about heroic volunteers in WICS (Women in Community Service) and VISTA (Volunteers in Service to America) from the Waco community and national projects. These included new experiments to end poverty like the Jobs Corps Police Training program which highlighted specialized police training of Black and white cadets, Job Corps Trainee jobs for women, the OEO nonprofit grocery store, Head Start kindergarten program, and WAMY Community Action work. [7]
Waco constituents were excited to take part in these programs. Community members reached out on behalf of friends and family members to get support from Poage for Job Corps positions. They argued that the individuals they supported, “needs desperately to be given a chance to learn what our local public schools could not give him – training in trade,” or sought information about skilled work for veterans, or asked for application forms and instructions for the Job Corps.
W. R. Poage Library [8]
Race, Politics, and Economics
But constituent responses included more than just glowing thanks and requests to take part in the programs. They also deeply reflected racial, political, and socio-economic viewpoints at the time. As the 1960s featured large issues like the Cold War and Civil Rights movements, these issues bled through the American response and perception of the OEO particularly through political allegiances, systemic racism, fears of juvenile delinquency, anxieties about the spread of Communism, and dramatic critiques, and led to articles and letters to legislators.
Race –
Race is a cental theme appearing throughout the constituent letters – both in positive, negative, and – somewhere in the middle – paternalistic ways. Letters from leaders of organization and businesses about funding and the labor of Black Americans demonstrate that several constituents found the OEO to be beneficial to the employment of Black Americans in their community.
Mrs. C. Blakely Bolin, in her letter to Congressman Poage, spoke of the OEO,
“As chairman of the Model Citys committee and Block Club in the Paul Quinn Neighborhood Area on behalf of all members, we sincerely express our thanks to you for the privilege of employment of our people in various fields of endeavor thro the EOAC. The Consideration exhibits your desire to assure our togetherness in improved relations in our community. This gesture has given the Afro-American in our city a desire to serve in the greatest capacity with all people.” [10]
Mrs. C. Blakely Bolin finds that OEO funding both brought her community together and offered opportunities for Black members of her community. Mr. A.P. Brasher takes a similar position when he writes to Congressman Poage from the neighboring city of Temple, Texas,
“…we are using some 18 year old Negro youngsters in our plant during the summer months and they are interested and are trying to train themselves with our help for the future. We are going to institute meetings with industries in Temple with the purpose of exploring “job opportunities” for the poorer people. As soon as this is accomplished we will ask the leadership of the Negro citizens to meet with us to help us implement this program.” [11]
Paired in his letter with a critique of the rising popularity of George Wallace, a known segregationist politician from Alabama, Brasher finds Black employment within his company as positive, even if it is through his very paternalistic position on economic opportunity in his community.
Programs like the Jobs Corps Police Training program which highlighted specialized police training of Black and white cadets, previously referenced in the newspaper article at the beginning of this article, also received input from constituents. Mr. W. P. Kelly writes to Representative Poage that, “The Police Training Academy is a fine example of yet another Jobs Corp program aimed at reclaiming ghetto youth while at the same time establishing a rapport in police/community relationships.” [12] Based on the racialized nature of the newspaper clipping that accompanied this letter, it can be assumed through this constituent’s racially coded response, that OEO programs are perceived as beneficial to Black Americans. [13]
Small glimpses in Indigenous and Chicano perspectives are also highlighted – but more directly through policy records than through direct letters. In December 1969, the Law Offices of Wilkinson, Cragun & Barker write to Congressman Poage on behalf of their clients,
“Arapahoe Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming; the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation, Montana; the Quinault Tribe of the Quinault Reservation, Washington; and the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota. We are also writing on behalf of our client, the National Congress of American Indians, the only national organization controlled by and representing American Indian Tribes and the Indian people. All of these Tribes and the National Congress of American Indians oppose the proposed Quie-Green “Economic Opportunity Act amendments of 1969.” [14]
Their clients opposed the proposed amendment because their communities were directly benefitted by Community Action Programs and the work of VISTA volunteers which they believed would be hurt by the transitioning the support of these programs to state governments.
W. R. Poage Library [15]
W. R. Poage Library [15]
Black, Indigenous, Migrant, and Chicano roles in the OEO are central to the story that appears in the saved correspondence, and for good reason. As historian William S. Clayson addresses in his book Freedom Is Not Enough: The War on Poverty and the Civil Rights Movement in Texas, the OEO connection to both Black and Chicano/a Civil Rights groups led to a distinct correlation between the two – particularly to Americans facing societal anxieties. [18] While this sometimes led to racist perceptions of what the program did, it also led to community collaboration as demonstrated in these letters.
Communism –
Cold War anxieties played a larger role in how constituents viewed the OEO. As socialism appeared to be more and more of a slippery slope to a Communist nation, OEO spending was viewed as the beginning of the end. With larger fears that their tax dollars were supporting individuals through this program that would turn the country towards Communism, for example Civil Rights groups from the previous section or anti-war protestors, constituents wrote to Representative Poage.
Mrs. Harold A. Smith writes,
“Much evidence is available from the public record to substantiate allegations made by Congressmen, Chief of Police and Mayors that the War on Poverty implemented by the OEO in Washington DC has become the weapon thru which chaos and destruction are being ignited in our cities at taxpayers expense… It seems to me that communists are still pursuing their goal to destroy USA from within. And with Taxpayers money.” [19]
Another constituent writes,
“Many reports keep piling in that our taxpayers money appropriated to relieve poverty is being used to promote rioting and destruction of property in many of our cities. The poverty program has many branches which often collect hoodlums, communists and many left wing agitators. Lets use our tax money in better programs than this.” [20]
In a mix of Communist fears and Civil Rights activism, the OEO became a Communist threat for some individuals.
Youth –
A compounded fear added to the anxieties over Civil Rights activism and Communism was the fear of juvenile delinquents. Following World War II, juvenile delinquency had been on the rise. Held in firm contrast to the rise of the nuclear family, these youths were seen as a component of the Communist threat to the United States, threatening the very moral fibers of the families that bound the nation together. [21] But beginning in the 1960s, youths also became the center of political action – as youths stood up in anti-War protests, sat at lunch counters in the Black Civil Rights Movement, and led protests in the Chicano, Asian American, and Indigenous freedom movements. The bodies of youths became a part of a contested political space.
These youths, juvenile delinquents, or hoodlums became either a valuable area for policy support or a funded threat. One event in the constituent letters stands out to symbolize this threat.
In Congress and in the press, Congressman Poage backed a constituent who attended the Upward Bound Program for disadvantaged youths at the University of North Carolina, who wrote to Poage and claimed that the program was poorly supervised by individuals that would “fit my description of a pusher or a hippie,” and allowed two speeches from a “known militant from Durham,” which prompted an occasion where, “dorm windows were broken, and things stolen from rooms and cars, according to dorm management.” [22]
Respondents in a newspaper article contradicted Poage’s constituent, arguing such absence of supervision and radical actions were not present, and that the “known militant” was named to be Civil Rights activist Howard Fuller who spoke along with other university administrators and professors.
While the language of the initial constituent complaint is written in highly racialized and politicized terminology, a second constituent also reports on the situation to Poage. This author also experienced the lack of supervision at the camp for high schoolers – and argues that the chaos and disorderliness was significant. While the author argued that he did not hold a racist perspective of the program, he did seem to maintain that these individuals did not seem prepared for a college preparation program, needed more supervision as young adults, and did cause disruption, if not the exact actions that the previous constituent had reported on.
Congressman Poage determined his positioning when he stated into the Congressional Record, “that he did not believe ‘that it is necessary that we abandon all efforts at what we have historically considered common courtesy or ordinary decency,’ in conducting the federally financed program.” While it is difficult to know what actually happened in this situation, it is clear that the press and public responses to the program demonstrate the combined fears of juvenile delinquency, with racialized and politicized dialogues, and economic spending on the OEO. [23]
Political –
Finally, politics played a significant role in response to the OEO. Congressman Poage himself, offered very measured responses in relationship to his support of the bills. While Poage supported the extension of the OEO, which he happily tells thankful constituents, his response to the letters always included this paragraph filled with a sense of possible failure,
“During the last Congress I supported an extension of the Office of Economic Opportunity. Of course, I realize that there are areas of this program which could and should be improved and refined; however, it seems to me that the good points outweigh the bad. As you know, the President has indicated that he feels some changes in the administration of the Office of Economic Opportunity are needed. The House Committee on Education and Labor is also making a detailed study of a proposal to extend the activities of this agency. At the present time, no one can say for sure what proposals will come from either the committee or the president.” [24]
A repeat response to glowing responses to the OEO, a majority of which were written by women, Poage demonstrates a measured response to the OEO. While it benefitted his community, he recognized that there was room for political improvement – especially through the lens of his fiscally conservative positioning.
This political response also led to constituent critique. One correspondent wrote a furious letter to Congressman Poage after the latter did not support new measures on the Food Stamp Act. His raging letter accused Poage of being a “drone” and stating that, “hopefully, your spot in hell will have a color tv so you’ll be able to see what you did to this country by playing your silly game with the food stamp bill.” [25]
Another angry constituent writes Congressman Poage from the opposite perspective, telling Poage to stand against greater support of the OEO as he declares, “I urge you to oppose the fraud upon America called the OEO.” [26] Even Kentucky Governor, the Hon. Louie B. Nunn, writes to Congressmen Poage about his problems with the OEO and belief that the program demonstrated a “failure to follow guidelines established by Congress, waste, unreasonable administrative cost, political activity, and program abuse.” [27]
While Congressman Poage navigated glowing praises of community growth, he also navigated the fact that people were dealing with their contexts of poverty, race, the Cold War, juvenile delinquency, and political responses. Poverty and the OEO was deeply rooted in communities and led to strong responses for and against the policies as they played out at the local level. Waco, Texas was one of these sites and the OEO at a local level demonstrates the many ways a local community was impacted by the War on Poverty at a political level.
Bibliography
[2] https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/annual-message-the-congress-the-state-the-union-25
[3] https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/special-message-the-congress-the-american-promise
[4] https://wacohistory.org/items/show/68#&gid=1&pid=4
[5] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31).
[6] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 6). “Progressing Despite Critics.”
[7] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 6).
[8] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 7).
[9] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 7).
[10] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 9). Letters to and from C. Blakely Bolin. May 1969.
[11] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 9). Letters to and from A.P. Brasher. June 1968.
[12] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 9). Letters to and from W.P. Kelly. September 1968.
[13] On the history of the racialization of the word “ghetto” in the US – https://time.com/5684505/ghetto-word-history/
[14] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 9). Letters to and from Glen A. Wilkinson. December 1969.
[15] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 32, Folder 14).
[16] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 1). Letters from James W. Griffith, Director Region VI, OEO. January 1971.
[17] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 1). Letter from News from the Office of Economic Opportunity, Director Region VI, OEO. June 1971.
[18] William S. Clayson, Freedom Is Not Enough: The War on Poverty and the Civil Rights Movement in Texas, University of Texas Press, (April 10, 2010).
[19] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 9). Letters from Mrs. Harold A. Smith. April 1968.
[20] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 9). Letter from Gene G. n.d.
[21] Marilyn Irvin Holt, Cold War Kids: Politics and Childhood in Postwar America, 1945-1960, University Press of Kansas – (May 9, 2014)
[22] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 6). “Congressman Hits Upward Bound Unit.”
[23] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 6). “Congressman Hits Upward Bound Unit.”
[24] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 9). Letter to Domingo Capetillo.
[25] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 10). Letters to and from Max L. Friedersdorf. January 1971.
[26] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 9). Letters to and from Mr. Walter F. Glace. February 1968.
[27] Baylor Collection of Political Materials W. R. Poage Legislative Library, Waco, Texas. (W. R. Poage U.S. Government Papers: Agencies, Boards and Commissions, Box 31, Folder 9). Letters to and from Hon. Louie B. Nunn. October 1969.