Now serving in the Indiana State Senate, Sue was an active participant in HERA activities, and a key member of NOW in Fort Wayne. She says:
Not enough women legislators. If more of us were pushing the vote button, we would have had the ERA. And you can post my answer for your students. Senator Sue
Monday, March 22, 2010
JILL CHAMBERS HAS MORE TO SAY
Further information from Jill Chambers:
I was really active In National Organization for Women (more than WPC, etc.- tho I belonged to most of the groups) and did NOW PR around the State throughout the 1976 push to elect the right legislators to pass ERA on January 18, 1977. Our women targeted races beginning in 1975, raised money and sent people into the districts to elect pro ERA people. On election night in 1976 we knew we had knocked Republican Senate Pro Tem Chip Edwards off his perch and replaced him with Demo Senate Pro Tem Robert Fair. That was the last time a Democrat held that position (1976-80). Unlike Florida and other states that thought they had elected ERA supporters, we did not leave them alone. Once elected we rode herd on them with volunteer lobbyists collaborating with everyone who supported ERA. One guy we helped elect voted against us on a procedural vote- a truck full of angry mail was delivered to his door. He voted with us thereafter.
Noting the death of a beloved, witty woman of the '70's, Liz Carpenter, Jill added:
Liz Carpenter, Author, Lady Bird Johnson’s Press Secretary passed away at 89 on March 20-
Here is a great quote from her regarding ERA:
"I personally am going to go to that Great Precinct Meeting in the Sky kicking and screaming if I'm not in the Constitution of the country that I worked for, paid taxes to, tried to be a total thinking citizen in," she wrote.
I was really active In National Organization for Women (more than WPC, etc.- tho I belonged to most of the groups) and did NOW PR around the State throughout the 1976 push to elect the right legislators to pass ERA on January 18, 1977. Our women targeted races beginning in 1975, raised money and sent people into the districts to elect pro ERA people. On election night in 1976 we knew we had knocked Republican Senate Pro Tem Chip Edwards off his perch and replaced him with Demo Senate Pro Tem Robert Fair. That was the last time a Democrat held that position (1976-80). Unlike Florida and other states that thought they had elected ERA supporters, we did not leave them alone. Once elected we rode herd on them with volunteer lobbyists collaborating with everyone who supported ERA. One guy we helped elect voted against us on a procedural vote- a truck full of angry mail was delivered to his door. He voted with us thereafter.
Noting the death of a beloved, witty woman of the '70's, Liz Carpenter, Jill added:
Liz Carpenter, Author, Lady Bird Johnson’s Press Secretary passed away at 89 on March 20-
Here is a great quote from her regarding ERA:
"I personally am going to go to that Great Precinct Meeting in the Sky kicking and screaming if I'm not in the Constitution of the country that I worked for, paid taxes to, tried to be a total thinking citizen in," she wrote.
COMMENTS FROM JILL CHAMBERS, charter member of Indiana National Organization of Women, now with the Indiana Family Support Services Agency.
Jill was a key member of the Indiana Women's Political Caucus and the Hoosiers for Equal Rights lobbying group. She was, among the many then-middle-aged women, the "youngster" and never failed for mentoring from ALL. She and others, are carrying on, if not the direct fight, the tradition of bringing women's history to the forefront in the 21st centur through the Indiana Women's History Association. Her comments, dated March 22, 2010, follow:
Subject: Re: "Why didn't the ERA pass?"
Primary reason: money.
Even Florida legislators who were elected because they said they would vote for ERA took insurance industry funds and voted no when it came up. Even though women went to the polls to defeat these turncoats, these guys ended up working for insurance companies. Charging women more for life and other insurance was pure profit for these companies and money did the ERA in.
In Illinois the Democratic party, unions were infighting- and yes money was behind that, too. Legislators who normally would have voted for ERA did not because of infighting.
Oklahoma- tons of money in a traditionally conservative state turned the trick. Much of it was insurance money. Considering that women made up less than 10 % of any legislative body at the time also had something to do with it.
Those three states could have given this country constitutional equality of rights for women- they failed. The campaigns for ERA were underfunded and less cohesive than they might have been, but it does not excuse the fact that the predominantly male dominated legislators killed the ERA. Yes, some women legislators voted against it, but they were a minority of women in all bodies. The majority of women legislators voted for it as well as the men in the 35 states. We needed 38 states.
The upside- most young women who did not go through the campaign- or care much about history at all, think it passed and act accordingly.
Subject: Re: "Why didn't the ERA pass?"
Primary reason: money.
Even Florida legislators who were elected because they said they would vote for ERA took insurance industry funds and voted no when it came up. Even though women went to the polls to defeat these turncoats, these guys ended up working for insurance companies. Charging women more for life and other insurance was pure profit for these companies and money did the ERA in.
In Illinois the Democratic party, unions were infighting- and yes money was behind that, too. Legislators who normally would have voted for ERA did not because of infighting.
Oklahoma- tons of money in a traditionally conservative state turned the trick. Much of it was insurance money. Considering that women made up less than 10 % of any legislative body at the time also had something to do with it.
Those three states could have given this country constitutional equality of rights for women- they failed. The campaigns for ERA were underfunded and less cohesive than they might have been, but it does not excuse the fact that the predominantly male dominated legislators killed the ERA. Yes, some women legislators voted against it, but they were a minority of women in all bodies. The majority of women legislators voted for it as well as the men in the 35 states. We needed 38 states.
The upside- most young women who did not go through the campaign- or care much about history at all, think it passed and act accordingly.
Friday, March 19, 2010
"Why didn't the ERA pass?" comments by Betty Packard Voris, self-employed lobbying dynamo
Packard-Voris was one of the women who registered with the Secretary of State to lobby for Hoosiers for the ERA (HERA). She was a Republican who, along with Mary Ann Butters and others, so acted. The primary registered democrat lobbyists were, as I recall, Molly Rucker and Virginia Dill McCarty, prominent Democrat who ran for governor, among other things. Here are Betty's comments, dated March 19, 2010:
Beth,
You are asked, "Why didn't it pass?" We have only to look at the health reform bill now in Congress; it is a reflection of what we were up against back then.
The opposition got a huge jump on us with some rather dramatic tactics led by Phyllis Schafley: It would destroy the family; We would be able to abort any or all children; It is not needed, we already have laws on the books; Men would not be able to support their families; We would raise homosexual children; Women are supposed to nurture children and protect the family; It is against God's law; etc etc etc Not unlike the death squads etc that have been floated to the sky in response to the proposed new health reform legislation. We played catch-up for 7 years with the opposition loud and vehement. The health reform legislation today has the backing and support of the president; that was not the case back then. We fought politics every day and the Republicans were in control of Congress and the presidency (Nixon and finally Ford who was not about to acquiesce to anything political at that point) and Republicans as a group were dead set against it.
We got it passed in Indiana because we lobbied for 7 long years and highlighted lots of Indiana laws (287 to be exact) which were discriminatory that got changed in the process. With the changing of those laws, we broke down some barriers that made the ERA seem less strident and made it easier for some Senators to vote for it - even if their constituents were not.
Does the Declaration have the vote? I would love to have a copy of the vote itself. I still remember Chip Edwards telling me that my blood would drip through the cracks of the State House before he would let the ERA pass.The day of the vote I went up to him and told him to skate in order to not be embarrassed. And he did skate. Would love to always have that plastered over my desk for a quiet chuckle now and then.
Beth,
You are asked, "Why didn't it pass?" We have only to look at the health reform bill now in Congress; it is a reflection of what we were up against back then.
The opposition got a huge jump on us with some rather dramatic tactics led by Phyllis Schafley: It would destroy the family; We would be able to abort any or all children; It is not needed, we already have laws on the books; Men would not be able to support their families; We would raise homosexual children; Women are supposed to nurture children and protect the family; It is against God's law; etc etc etc Not unlike the death squads etc that have been floated to the sky in response to the proposed new health reform legislation. We played catch-up for 7 years with the opposition loud and vehement. The health reform legislation today has the backing and support of the president; that was not the case back then. We fought politics every day and the Republicans were in control of Congress and the presidency (Nixon and finally Ford who was not about to acquiesce to anything political at that point) and Republicans as a group were dead set against it.
We got it passed in Indiana because we lobbied for 7 long years and highlighted lots of Indiana laws (287 to be exact) which were discriminatory that got changed in the process. With the changing of those laws, we broke down some barriers that made the ERA seem less strident and made it easier for some Senators to vote for it - even if their constituents were not.
Does the Declaration have the vote? I would love to have a copy of the vote itself. I still remember Chip Edwards telling me that my blood would drip through the cracks of the State House before he would let the ERA pass.The day of the vote I went up to him and told him to skate in order to not be embarrassed. And he did skate. Would love to always have that plastered over my desk for a quiet chuckle now and then.
Comments from Nancy Papas, lobbyist for Indiana State Teachers' Association.
Ed. note:Nancy Papas was a najor player in supporting the Equal Rights Amendment. An assistant to Senator Birch Bayh at the time of the ERA passage through Congress, she and ISTA and a few other "veterans" gave substance, respectability, and great advice and action to the novice ERA supporters. Here is her statement, dated March 19, 2010, in response to the question "Why didn't the ERA pass?"
"ERA was the victim of massive disinformation which scared off conservatives in both parties. The ERA had strong bi-partisan support in Congress. If Strom Thurmond could support the ERA, why not other conservatives?
Phyllis Schlafly built her nation-wide network of conservative women by raising false alarms about what it would do. Equal rights for women and men would not force everyone to use the same restroom, though most of us do that at home and on airplanes – just not at the same time – and we have survived very nicely.
ERA opponents charged that it would encourage women to have abortions, though no one could ever explain how. Virginia McCarty asked if that meant men would be able to have abortions too?
Fear clouds intelligent thought, and fear was the weapon of choice against ERA.
Fortunately, the successful efforts to pass legislation like Title IX and the civil and voting rights acts made America much more aware of discrimination of various sorts. Title IX alone has exploded educational opportunities for women students and made them much more able to compete in the market place.
When I first lobbied for ERA in the halls of the state legislature, a handful of women reporters and lobbyists were there and another handful of women legislators. Now it appears nearly half the lobbyists are women, and the voters have elected 32 women legislators and a female Lt. Governor. Both political parties actively recruit women candidates. Governors and Mayors appoint women department heads. Network and Cable News has women anchors. Television dramas feature women in occupations formerly reserved for men. Today’s little girls want to grow up to be CEO’s and company presidents rather than Cinderella.
We may have lost the ERA battle, but women are making real progress to win the war.
We had the help of many progressive women and men who celebrated, promoted, and were not fearful of legal equality of women.
In addition to you Beth, there was Virginia McCarty, Betty Blumberg, Mandy Wertz and Betty Williams, Jane Fribley, Jill Chambers, Sue Errington (who’s now in the State Senate), Laurie Scholl (and many others) plus ERA’s author - Birch Bayh – and state legislators Kermit Burrous, Tom Teague, Bob Fair, Phil Bainbridge, Cliff Arnold, Tom Fruechtenicht, Bob Hayes, and others.
The battle to help women and families gain their due continues to be sure, but extraordinary women throughout history found ways to survive, to raise their families, and to contribute to their neighbors and communities despite incredible obstacles. Fortunately, we were able to stand on the shoulders of them all.
"ERA was the victim of massive disinformation which scared off conservatives in both parties. The ERA had strong bi-partisan support in Congress. If Strom Thurmond could support the ERA, why not other conservatives?
Phyllis Schlafly built her nation-wide network of conservative women by raising false alarms about what it would do. Equal rights for women and men would not force everyone to use the same restroom, though most of us do that at home and on airplanes – just not at the same time – and we have survived very nicely.
ERA opponents charged that it would encourage women to have abortions, though no one could ever explain how. Virginia McCarty asked if that meant men would be able to have abortions too?
Fear clouds intelligent thought, and fear was the weapon of choice against ERA.
Fortunately, the successful efforts to pass legislation like Title IX and the civil and voting rights acts made America much more aware of discrimination of various sorts. Title IX alone has exploded educational opportunities for women students and made them much more able to compete in the market place.
When I first lobbied for ERA in the halls of the state legislature, a handful of women reporters and lobbyists were there and another handful of women legislators. Now it appears nearly half the lobbyists are women, and the voters have elected 32 women legislators and a female Lt. Governor. Both political parties actively recruit women candidates. Governors and Mayors appoint women department heads. Network and Cable News has women anchors. Television dramas feature women in occupations formerly reserved for men. Today’s little girls want to grow up to be CEO’s and company presidents rather than Cinderella.
We may have lost the ERA battle, but women are making real progress to win the war.
We had the help of many progressive women and men who celebrated, promoted, and were not fearful of legal equality of women.
In addition to you Beth, there was Virginia McCarty, Betty Blumberg, Mandy Wertz and Betty Williams, Jane Fribley, Jill Chambers, Sue Errington (who’s now in the State Senate), Laurie Scholl (and many others) plus ERA’s author - Birch Bayh – and state legislators Kermit Burrous, Tom Teague, Bob Fair, Phil Bainbridge, Cliff Arnold, Tom Fruechtenicht, Bob Hayes, and others.
The battle to help women and families gain their due continues to be sure, but extraordinary women throughout history found ways to survive, to raise their families, and to contribute to their neighbors and communities despite incredible obstacles. Fortunately, we were able to stand on the shoulders of them all.
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT RATIFICATION IN INDIANA
EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT RATIFICATION IN INDIANA
TOO LITTLE . . . TOO LATE . . .
By Beth Van Vorst Gray
The Indiana State Senate, on January 18, 1977, adopted HJR 2, a joint resolution approved by the House of Representatives in like form on January 12. With that final action, the 100th Indiana General Assembly ratified the “Equal Rights Amendment” (ERA) after five years of discussion and debate on the local and national scene, and extensive, emotional lobbying by both pro- and anti- ERA forces in Indiana. Indiana was the 35th and last state to ratify out of the thirty-eight states needed to make it the 28th amendment to the United States Constitution. And I was there.
Elected in 1970 to the position of Principal Secretary of the Indiana State Senate by the Republican caucus, I remained in that post until August 1976. From January 1973, when the ERA was introduced for the first time in Indiana, until 1976 I had a window on the action. Literally. When in session, my post was in the “well,” a half-circle desk below the podium of the presiding officer; in the remodeled Senate of 1974, my office faced floor-to-ceiling walnut-paned windows which opened on an uninterrupted view of the floor of the Senate. When the General Assembly is in session, the entire statehouse echoes with the dueling loudspeakers of the House and Senate; but I had a front row seat to the action as well. It was, at times, an uncomfortable seat because I was an ERA advocate although I was elected by and reported to the Senate Republican Caucus, generally considered the road block to Indiana’s ratification of the ERA. Under the Standing Rules of the Senate, the majority caucus is responsible for administration of the chambers and elects the Principal Secretary to carry out those duties. The 97th General Assembly (1971-1972) was the first authorized by referendum in the 1970 general election to meet annually. New ground was being broken, precedents set for year-round staffing and professionalism, and systems were being established to provide information available through the Principal Secretary’s office to all members of the Senate and the public. The new Indiana Code was introduced and enacted, and computer technology came on the scene. It was front-page news when we brought a huge Xerox photocopier into a room adjacent to the Senate floor. Prior to 1970, the entire House and Senate, staff and members, were dependent on one sole copier in the legislative support agency that, at that time, closed at 5 pm.
Senator Phillip E. Gutman (R., Fort Wayne), President pro tempore of the Senate, to whom I reported, made it very clear that the political life of the Senate was the domain of the Senators; the administrative support system was my responsibility as the Principal Secretary. As an individual citizen outside the State House, however, I was free to express myself at will. My visible support of ratification of the ERA was, however, unpopular with some members of the caucus that elected me in 1970 and twice more – in 1972 and 1974.
Although new to the workforce, I realized that women needed the tools to provide for their own and their children’s well-being, especially when the traditional customs and responsibilities of marriage break down; a new generation of young women was entering the workplace fully prepared to be there, but without the same rights of the young men. Women were not issued credit in their own name and equality in pay, still not in balance, was a real joke in the early ‘70s. Harassment and other kinds of discrimination were commonplace and it seemed that no one, except the powerless women who were being discriminated against, even noticed.
Before the Equal Rights amendment could be considered by the states, the amendment, in the form of a joint resolution, had to be adopted by both houses of Congress. In 1972, when circumstances made it possible to consider the amendment after 50 years of introduction, political pundits were predicting adoption and swift ratification by the state legislatures. As we now know, Indiana was the thirty-fifth, and last, state to ratify before June, 1977, the deadline negotiated by Representative Emanuel Cellers (D., NY) and Senator Sam Ervin (D., NC). The ERA was one of a few proposed constitutional amendments to carry a restriction on the length of time allowed for ratification by the states. As 1977 approached and ratification of three more states was needed, the deadline was extended by Congress to June, 1982 but the three additional ratifications were not found.
The amendment itself was simple enough: three short paragraphs, consisting of the final version written by Alice Paul in 1943 (merging the Lucretia Mott version, introduced in prior sessions, and the Susan B. Anthony version).
“Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”
“Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”
“Section 3. This amendment shall take effect seven years after the date of ratification.”
The equal rights amendment was introduced every year from 1923 until adopted by Congress in 1972 and, stubbornly, every year after the ratification extended timetable ran out, which was from 1983 to present. In the 107th Congress (2001-2002), Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D., MA) introduced the ERA in the U.S. Senate, word for word as written in 1923, as SJR 10; Representative Carolyn Maloney, (D., NY) introduced it as HJR 40 in the House of Representatives..
During the 1960s, Representative Cellers (D-New York) held the Equal Rights Amendment prisoner in his powerful House Judiciary Committee where it stayed for more than a decade. In June 1970, Representative Martha Griffiths (D-Michigan) got 218 colleagues in the House to sign a discharge petition forcing Cellers to pass the resolution out of committee, a procedure known appropriately as “blasting” in some legislatures. There is no greater ally in a legislative struggle than an influential member of the body itself – like Griffiths – and there is no deadlier enemy than an influential member of the body itself, -- like Cellers – as Indiana pro-ERA forces would learn a few years later, as Senator Joan Gubbins (R., Indianapolis) led the Indiana battle against adoption of the amendment.
Both houses of Congress must adopt, by a two-thirds majority, a joint resolution in like form to approve a constitutional amendment and send it to the states for ratification. The ERA passed the House in 1971 and was sent to the Senate where it was scheduled for third reading on March 22, 1972. The Friday before, March 17, Senator Birch E. Bayh (D, Indiana), fearing a lack of committed votes for passage, called upon members of the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC, a newly formed bipartisan group that supported women in both parties to run for political office), National Organization of Women, better known as NOW, the League of Women Voters, and other national pro-ERA groups to work through their members in the several states to create grassroots support for the measure with the senators from their districts. The NWPC call to arms was significant because, if Indiana is any measure, it highlighted the urgency of ratification and it brought women experienced in politics into the pro-ERA network who were knowledgeable about lobbying and the political process. Proponents called friends and allies asking them to call THEIR friends and allies to urge them to call or write their state’s U.S. senators asking for adoption. By Monday morning, March 20, the Senate was inundated with mail and phone calls urging adoption, and, on March 22, 1972 the Equal Rights Amendment was adopted by the Senate.
Notice was given to each of the states that Congress had so acted, and that the clock was running. In Indiana, organizations were mobilizing to work for ratification. The Indiana chapter of NOW (founded by Betty Newcomb from Muncie, Affirmative Action Officer at Ball State) was mobilizing; the newly formed Indiana and the Greater Indianapolis Women’s Political Caucus (IWPC and GIWPC), both organizations co-chaired by Virginia Dill McCarty, a Democrat and prominent attorney in Indianapolis, and Mary Anne Butters, a Republican from Indianapolis and former newspaperwoman on the staff of then Mayor Richard G. Lugar. Other established local groups, including the local units of national organizations that were supporting the ERA, joined the effort as well – the AFL/CIO, Church Women United, the YWCA, and the League of Women Voters to mention only a few.
The women’s political caucuses, by the way, were coalitions of committed democrat and republican feminists working together in the same organization for a common goal, a highly unique occurrence. Though discussions were often heated and verged on the partisan in board meetings, the resulting collaboration proved a successful one in support of the Equal Rights Amendment and other critical legislation.
The first chance to introduce a joint resolution to the Indiana General Assembly would be in the 98th General Assembly, 1973-1974. In the short time left in 1972 before the session began in January 1973, ERA proponents worked feverishly, starting from ground zero, to lay the foundation for introduction and passage. Discussions with legislative and party leaders were under way and a speakers’ bureau was formed to present the Equal Rights Amendment information to existing women’s groups in the state. Membership drives and lobbying seminars were launched in every corner of the state and women and men who supported the amendment formed a strong coalition and active grassroots support of the measure. The legislative members’ probable yeas and nays were toted up and organizations known to be favorable to passage were recruited. A pro-ERA liaison from his/her own district was assigned to each member of the General Assembly to put local pressure on recalcitrant legislators and to support the pro-ERA legislators. They held fundraisers, set up information booths at state and county fairs, courted the news media, and enlisted large numbers of people to their cause. The “basics” were in place. As support grew over the state and, as the ERA forces joined their talents and energy with other well-established organizations with a legislative presence, their effectiveness increased.
In late 1974, the groundwork, education, and media information being established, Hoosiers for the Equal Rights Amendment (HERA), a pro-ERA coalition of organizations supported the lobbying effort led by Virginia Dill McCarty (D, Marion County) and Betty Packard Voris (R., Marion County) members of the Indiana Women’s Political Caucus, both of whom were seasoned politicians. A well-funded operation representing a coalition of over 60 organizations, HERA set up an office across the street from the Statehouse and opened an in-session hospitality room in the nearby Hilton Hotel. Coordination and cooperation existed among the coalition members, some of which provided lighter moments in the midst of a very focused campaign.
As Jill Chambers, then and still a member of NOW, pointed out recently, “We often played ‘Good Guys/Bad Guys’.” NOW was an activist group that, among other methods of persuasion, utilized civil disobedience as a tool. Therefore, when they would picket the Governor’s mansion or otherwise ruffle official feathers, the ERA lobbyists (primarily IWPC members, but operating, of course, under the same HERA umbrella as the NOW contingency) would go to legislative and government leaders and say “Wouldn’t you rather deal with us? See our white hats?” This almost backfired when a truckload of pro-ERA mail ended up on the lawn of a representative from Bloomington who had reneged (in a committee hearing) on a campaign promise to support the ERA. The press thoroughly enjoyed this; it was decidedly NOT humorous, however, to the leadership of the Indiana General Assembly and the pro-ERA lobbyists had some fence-mending to do.
These were the days before e-mail or voicemail; it even pre-dates the wide use of faxes and copy machines. It was, however, crucial to be able to get word out quickly across the state and a statewide “telephone tree” was established that could – and did – produce astounding results in a short period of time. With one well-placed phone call from a telephone booth at the Statehouse, callers in coalition organizations across the state were notified, each “branch” calling the assigned “leaves” in their group. A virtual shower of mail and phone calls could be generated – targeting constituents in one legislator’s home district or creating a flood of constituent mail from all districts to their representatives in the House or Senate.
Pushing a proposal through the Indiana General Assembly is a daunting task; overcoming the deadly inertia of the status quo takes diligent attention to many fronts. While promoting the issues, it is also necessary to keep faith with the legislators who support your side and maintain credibility with the public, partners in your coalition, other lobbyists, and state officials. By 1975, the HERA coalition had gained enough credibility to be sought out by other groups to endorse significant legislation on women’s issues. The pro-ERA lobbyists, then, use their own hard-won influence and were working hand-in-glove with other groups to pass needed women’s rights legislation in Indiana. Indeed, many pro-women’s issues were addressed in the late 1970s. In 1973, ninety-seven Indiana laws on the books with discriminatory language were identified and amended or eliminated.
House Joint Resolution 12, the “proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to equal rights for men and women,” was introduced in the 1973 “long” session of the 98th General Assembly and was adopted by the House of Representatives by a vote of 53 to 45 on February 14, 1973. There is some subtle irony here; quite possibly it was the work of the authors, William S. Latz (R., Fort Wayne) and Clifford D. Arnold (D., La Porte), or, perhaps, Kermit O. Burrous (R., Peru) who, as Speaker, had the power to hand bills down for passage . . . or not. HJR 12 was heard in the House and adopted on Valentine’s Day! Arnold, by the way, was either sponsor or author of the Equal Rights Amendment every session that it was introduced. Neither the Republican nor Democrat Caucuses in the House of Representatives wavered in support of the ERA over the four years it took to achieve ratification, although the overall vote was tight from time to time. Pro- and anti-ERA forces were extremely active in presenting their arguments – in one instance, anti-ERA lobbyists put fresh-baked bread on the desk of each legislator – and no votes could be taken for granted. Conservative legislators, both House and Senate, claimed, generally, that it violated state sovereignty since enforcement was mandated by the resolution to be at the federal level, and was, therefore, a “states’ rights issue”; a second powerful argument suggested that the ERA would “weaken the family structure.”
When ratification by 38 states became a real possibility in early 1974, Phyllis Schlafly of the “Eagle Forum” in Illinois, an influential conservative organization, founded the STOP ERA movement. Schlafly and her followers exploited the fears already lurking in the minds of many people: girls/daughters going to war, unisex bathrooms, nullification of rape laws, and the like. The media and scholarly studies from the early 1980s, however, give Schafly high marks for the successful STOP ERA campaign she mounted. Through her already established information sources, her newsletters and publications targeting women, she provided focus, research, and high visibility for the anti-ERA position that contributed in great measure in securing thirteen states in the “no” column. The press gave the issue excellent coverage especially when the anti-ERA forces geared up and debates between the two factions heated up as attention moved to the marginal, but very emotional, issues.
The fallout in Indiana from the intensified opposition was considerable, though not insurmountable. Evelyn Pitschke (now deceased), legal advisor to both the Eagle Forum and STOP ERA, was an Indianapolis attorney. She and Senator Joan Gubbins (R., Indianapolis) led the anti-ERA movement in Indiana and their efforts eroded some ERA support in the House and almost claimed a crucial vote in the Senate in 1977. By 1976, STOP ERA was in high gear and the national ERA “steamroller” faltered, eventually coming to a dead stop.
The House joint resolution was brought to a vote in the Senate late in the session – April 2nd, 1973 – and was defeated by a vote of 16 to 34. Members of the Senate Republican Caucus continued to block passage of the ERA for the six years it controlled the Senate – three General Assemblies – the 97th, 98th, and 99th; from 1971 through 1976.
Pro-ERA lobbyists squared off against the Senate Republican Caucus which outnumbered the Democrats in the Senate by 30 to 20. The caucus had elected Phillip E. Gutman as President pro tempore and Martin K. Edwards (R., New Castle) as Majority Caucus Leader. James A. Gardner (R., Fowler) was appointed Majority Floor Leader. There was a strong conservative contingency in this caucus and Senator Gubbins led them in opposition to the ERA. Other legislators, republican and democrat, needed those conservative votes to enact other legislation and could not, though perhaps not “against” the ERA, sacrifice votes needed from those conservative republican members for their own priority legislation. Senator Robert D. Garton (R., Columbus; now president pro tempore of the Senate), republican co-sponsor with Philip Hayes (D-Evansville), of the joint resolution to approve the equal rights amendment, was the lone ERA advocate in the Republican Caucus until the November 1976 elections. Garton, as a freshman senator in 1971, had introduced a bill on non-discrimination in the workplace for women and other individuals which passed. He stayed the course and was instrumental in the ratification of the ERA in 1977. The Senate democrats, though having several strong anti-ERA voices, tipped the balance in favor of ratification but never had enough votes to impact passage until 1977 when democrats controlled the Senate.
One of the toughest arguments to counter, in Indiana as well as in other states, was the state's rights stand that claimed the ERA issue as one of those included as not specifically authorized by the Constitution, which, therefore, remains at the discretion of the severak states.
In both the 1973 and 1975 sessions, Senators Gubbins and Clarence Kelley (R., South Bend) introduced an amendment to the state constitution to guarantee equal rights regardless of sex. If successful, that action would circumvent passage of an amendment that had federal “teeth.” This measure was adopted by the Senate on March 12, 1975, on a tie vote broken by Robert D. Orr (R., Evansville), President of the Senate, who cast the deciding vote of “aye” (an “aye” vote for the Gubbins amendment was, in effect, a nullifying vote for the federal amendment). The measure was adopted in the Senate but did not survive the democrat-controlled House committee assignment to Rules and Legislative Procedures. The issue of equal rights for women was dead until the next General Assembly, the 100th, convened in January 1977.
Introduced and adopted by the House in both the 1975 and 1976 session, the joint resolution for approval of the ERA did not, however, survive assignment to the Senate “graveyard committee” chaired by Senator Edwards, Majority Caucus Chairman. In 1975, his Governmental Affairs Committee met to consider the amendment and killed the resolution by an 8 to 5 party-line vote – on Valentine’s Day. That same session, a motion to amend the resolution on second reading was proposed by Senator Garton. The motion to strip another joint resolution (remove its contents and substitute new language) that had already passed out of committee and insert the Equal Rights Amendment was also defeated, 27 to 21. The Indianapolis Star reported that Garton, in requesting the substitution, asked “What is wrong with extending the constitutional rights and privilege to all members of our society? . . .”
During the 1976 elections, now nominating and electing the 100th General Assembly (including the 1977 and 1978 sessions of the General Assembly), pro-ERA activists in the coalition worked to unseat incumbents who were opposed to the ERA. Volunteers worked in the precincts in many cities across the state and, in Evansville, helped J. Richard Harris (R., Evansville), on record as an advocate for women’s rights, win the Senate. He defeated Harry Thompson (R, Evansville), who had voted consistently against the measure and John Larson (R., Lake and Porter), a pro-ERA legislator who had served in the House of Representative, had defeated the democrat incumbent there.
The ultimate battlefield, however, was the Indiana State Senate vote tally board and, finally, in 1977, the hard work of the pro-ERA coalition paid off. In the 100th General Assembly, the House of Representatives was again republican-controlled by a slim margin of 52 to 48 under the leadership of Speaker Kermit Burrous (R., Brazil) and the democrats had won control of the Senate by a slim margin of 6 votes (28 to 22) under the leadership of President pro tempore Robert J. Fair (D, Princeton). Frank O’Bannon (D., Corydon), now governor, chaired the powerful Senate Finance Committee and Senator Martin K. Edwards was elected minority leader of the Senate Republican Caucus. Resigning from my post before the election and now working as a Legal Administrator at an Indianapolis law firm, I was now watching proceedings through the glass windows at the back of the Chambers and assisting the lobbying efforts of the ERA coalition.
On January 12, 1977, the Equal Rights Amendment (now HJR 2) was adopted by the House of Representatives by a vote of 54 to 45 and was again sent to the Senate, now controlled by the democrats. There were a series of legislative maneuvers as HJR 2 made its way through the steps of passage in the Senate. All legitimate, they were attempts to defer the now-imminent passage of the resolution in hopes that the momentum to passage could be stalled. Senator Bruggenschmidt (D., Jasper) introduced a motion to amend on second reading to strip the resolution and insert in lieu thereof the appointment of a study committee to report to the General Assembly before September 1978 and, further, that a referendum on the issue be placed on the ballot for the 1978 general election. The motion was ruled out of order by the chair (President Orr presiding), and the decision of the chair was appealed. Senator Fair presided during the appeal and the resulting vote, yeas 26, nays 23, defeated the stripping attempt and was a harbinger of success at last, Senators Harris and John Larson having joined the Republican Caucus, swaying the vote in favor of ratification.
Senator Thomas J. Teague (D-Marion), Senate sponsor, called HJR 2 down for third reading on the next day, January 18, 1977, in the presence of a tense Senate body and gallery anticipating a close, hard-fought vote. It was less than two weeks into the session – such “fast track” passage was unusual, but crucial because the more time that elapsed before third reading when the bill was placed on passage, the more “yea” votes could become “soft.” Senator W. Wayne Townsend (D., Grant), serving a conservative constituency, began to have second thoughts on his promised “yea” vote. A personal phone call from the First Lady, Rosalynn Carter, in which she promised to visit his district to support him in return for his vote, saved the day. Maureen Reagan visited the Republican legislators and George H. Bush, then head of the Republican National Committee (and later, 41st president) was on record in favor of the amendment and had called the members of the Republican caucus asking each to vote his or her conscience in light of the importance of the issue for women. His careful wording in the conservative caucus didn’t garner any extra votes, but it did shore up the three battle-weary Republicans who would put the Senate ERA vote “in the green.”
One “yea” vote changed to “nay” would have thrown the Senate into a tie (adoption requires 26 votes), which would be broken by the President of the Senate, Lieutenant Governor Orr. Although low-key in his statements about the measure, he had already indicated possible opposition to a federal constitutional amendment to adopt ERA in a key vote in 1975 (he broke a tie vote – the only time a President of the Senate is allowed to vote – in favor of a state level constitutional amendment); a “nay” from the Chair would have defeated the amendment.
Again relying on procedural tactics to defer passage, Senator Edwards introduced a motion (signed by 23 other senators) to defer third reading of HJR 2 until March 15, 1977. The motion was tabled by a roll call vote of 26-24 which was another indication that victory was close at hand. Ratification had been an emotional issue and the strain on legislators was beginning to show. In Senate co-sponsor J. Richard Harris’s closing speech, he said “These have been difficult days and I know well what difficult days they have been . . . . I hope that, when we come back [from the Democrat and Republican caucuses which had been called immediately following the vote] to handle the serious business of this state, the divisiveness of this issue will not reflect in our findings.” The voting machine was opened and the measure passed by a “squeaker” vote of 26 to 24. Senators Garton, Harris, and Larson (R., Lake and Porter) joined twenty-three Democrats in voting yes.
Packed with both anti-ERA representatives wearing big “STOP” signs reading “STOP ERA” and ERA proponents wearing “ERA – YES!!!” buttons, the Senate gallery and the halls beyond the Chambers were teeming with pro- and anti-ERA supporters. When the green lights went up on the board to the total of 26, the gallery and the halls beyond the Chambers exploded with cheers until the President of the Senate gaveled them down. House Joint Resolution 2 became law (Public Law 356) and Congress was so informed. Indiana was the thirty-fifth state to ratify out of a needed thirty-eight.
Personal involvement in a cause is life-changing and, in this instance, the years since have added an historic aspect to those frantic days. Friendships and networking created under the press of a common goal and a deadline every day forges a special bond. For women of the ‘70s, the ERA ratification campaign was a heady experience in empowerment; for women of today and the future, a necessary first-step out into new space that must be taken for progress in any area of endeavor.
P.S. or footnote: There was a short-lived attempt in the 1978 session of the General Assembly to rescind the action whereby the Equal Rights Amendment was ratified in 1977 on the ground that supporters of the ERA made “false and deceptive use of forged letters” in the House that was unsuccessful. There are, however, some interesting recent developments in the battle for the equal rights amendment. There is a legal challenge pending (still pending, 2010) which asserts that the Equal Rights Amendment, as passed by Congress in 1972 and ratified by 35 states, can be declared a constitutional amendment with ratification of three more states, disregarding the time limitation for passage that was negotiated into the joint resolution by Senator Ervin and Representative Cellers over thirty years ago.. The amendment, as adopted by Congress (and Indiana, of course), was introduced in 2002 in the legislatures of five states that did not ratify – Illinois, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Virginia. As of June 2003, the Illinois legislature has adjourned, leaving ratification of the equal rights amendment on the table.
Recommended reading:
Berry, Mary Frances, Why ERA Failed. Indiana University Press. Bloomington 1986.
Held, Allison, Sheryl Herndon, and Danielle Stager “The Equal Rights Amendment: Why the ERA Remains Legally Viable and Properly Before the States,” William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law, Spring 1997.
Hoff-Wilson, Joan, ed. Rights of Passage: The Past and Future of the ERA. Indiana University Press. Bloomington 1986.
Journals of Proceedings: Indiana House of Representatives and Indiana Senate; 1973 through 1977. Indiana State Archives, Indianapolis
Seward, Linda Gail, Ph.D. The Equal Rights Amendment Campaign in Indiana: A Study of Ideas and Arguments Purdue University, 1991. (dissertation)
Walsh, Justin, The Centennial History of the Indiana General Assembly, 1816-1978. Indiana Historical Bureau, Indianapolis 1987.
Women’s Collection, Indiana Historical Society Library, Indianapolis, Indiana.
About the Author:
A writer, Beth Van Vorst Gray is the author of A Look Back: Examining the Past and Celebrating the Present (1995), a history of The Health Foundation of Greater Indianapolis, and a number of articles published under the name Beth Van Vorst Greene. Currently president of the board of directors, Indiana Women’s History Association, she was a board member of the Greater Indianapolis Women’s Political Caucus (GIWPC) from 1972-1974 and Principal Secretary of the Indiana State Senate from 1970 through 1976. She is immediate past president of the Indiana Women’s History Association, dedicated to preserving the manuscripts and memorabilia of women in all walks of life.
TOO LITTLE . . . TOO LATE . . .
By Beth Van Vorst Gray
The Indiana State Senate, on January 18, 1977, adopted HJR 2, a joint resolution approved by the House of Representatives in like form on January 12. With that final action, the 100th Indiana General Assembly ratified the “Equal Rights Amendment” (ERA) after five years of discussion and debate on the local and national scene, and extensive, emotional lobbying by both pro- and anti- ERA forces in Indiana. Indiana was the 35th and last state to ratify out of the thirty-eight states needed to make it the 28th amendment to the United States Constitution. And I was there.
Elected in 1970 to the position of Principal Secretary of the Indiana State Senate by the Republican caucus, I remained in that post until August 1976. From January 1973, when the ERA was introduced for the first time in Indiana, until 1976 I had a window on the action. Literally. When in session, my post was in the “well,” a half-circle desk below the podium of the presiding officer; in the remodeled Senate of 1974, my office faced floor-to-ceiling walnut-paned windows which opened on an uninterrupted view of the floor of the Senate. When the General Assembly is in session, the entire statehouse echoes with the dueling loudspeakers of the House and Senate; but I had a front row seat to the action as well. It was, at times, an uncomfortable seat because I was an ERA advocate although I was elected by and reported to the Senate Republican Caucus, generally considered the road block to Indiana’s ratification of the ERA. Under the Standing Rules of the Senate, the majority caucus is responsible for administration of the chambers and elects the Principal Secretary to carry out those duties. The 97th General Assembly (1971-1972) was the first authorized by referendum in the 1970 general election to meet annually. New ground was being broken, precedents set for year-round staffing and professionalism, and systems were being established to provide information available through the Principal Secretary’s office to all members of the Senate and the public. The new Indiana Code was introduced and enacted, and computer technology came on the scene. It was front-page news when we brought a huge Xerox photocopier into a room adjacent to the Senate floor. Prior to 1970, the entire House and Senate, staff and members, were dependent on one sole copier in the legislative support agency that, at that time, closed at 5 pm.
Senator Phillip E. Gutman (R., Fort Wayne), President pro tempore of the Senate, to whom I reported, made it very clear that the political life of the Senate was the domain of the Senators; the administrative support system was my responsibility as the Principal Secretary. As an individual citizen outside the State House, however, I was free to express myself at will. My visible support of ratification of the ERA was, however, unpopular with some members of the caucus that elected me in 1970 and twice more – in 1972 and 1974.
Although new to the workforce, I realized that women needed the tools to provide for their own and their children’s well-being, especially when the traditional customs and responsibilities of marriage break down; a new generation of young women was entering the workplace fully prepared to be there, but without the same rights of the young men. Women were not issued credit in their own name and equality in pay, still not in balance, was a real joke in the early ‘70s. Harassment and other kinds of discrimination were commonplace and it seemed that no one, except the powerless women who were being discriminated against, even noticed.
Before the Equal Rights amendment could be considered by the states, the amendment, in the form of a joint resolution, had to be adopted by both houses of Congress. In 1972, when circumstances made it possible to consider the amendment after 50 years of introduction, political pundits were predicting adoption and swift ratification by the state legislatures. As we now know, Indiana was the thirty-fifth, and last, state to ratify before June, 1977, the deadline negotiated by Representative Emanuel Cellers (D., NY) and Senator Sam Ervin (D., NC). The ERA was one of a few proposed constitutional amendments to carry a restriction on the length of time allowed for ratification by the states. As 1977 approached and ratification of three more states was needed, the deadline was extended by Congress to June, 1982 but the three additional ratifications were not found.
The amendment itself was simple enough: three short paragraphs, consisting of the final version written by Alice Paul in 1943 (merging the Lucretia Mott version, introduced in prior sessions, and the Susan B. Anthony version).
“Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”
“Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”
“Section 3. This amendment shall take effect seven years after the date of ratification.”
The equal rights amendment was introduced every year from 1923 until adopted by Congress in 1972 and, stubbornly, every year after the ratification extended timetable ran out, which was from 1983 to present. In the 107th Congress (2001-2002), Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D., MA) introduced the ERA in the U.S. Senate, word for word as written in 1923, as SJR 10; Representative Carolyn Maloney, (D., NY) introduced it as HJR 40 in the House of Representatives..
During the 1960s, Representative Cellers (D-New York) held the Equal Rights Amendment prisoner in his powerful House Judiciary Committee where it stayed for more than a decade. In June 1970, Representative Martha Griffiths (D-Michigan) got 218 colleagues in the House to sign a discharge petition forcing Cellers to pass the resolution out of committee, a procedure known appropriately as “blasting” in some legislatures. There is no greater ally in a legislative struggle than an influential member of the body itself – like Griffiths – and there is no deadlier enemy than an influential member of the body itself, -- like Cellers – as Indiana pro-ERA forces would learn a few years later, as Senator Joan Gubbins (R., Indianapolis) led the Indiana battle against adoption of the amendment.
Both houses of Congress must adopt, by a two-thirds majority, a joint resolution in like form to approve a constitutional amendment and send it to the states for ratification. The ERA passed the House in 1971 and was sent to the Senate where it was scheduled for third reading on March 22, 1972. The Friday before, March 17, Senator Birch E. Bayh (D, Indiana), fearing a lack of committed votes for passage, called upon members of the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC, a newly formed bipartisan group that supported women in both parties to run for political office), National Organization of Women, better known as NOW, the League of Women Voters, and other national pro-ERA groups to work through their members in the several states to create grassroots support for the measure with the senators from their districts. The NWPC call to arms was significant because, if Indiana is any measure, it highlighted the urgency of ratification and it brought women experienced in politics into the pro-ERA network who were knowledgeable about lobbying and the political process. Proponents called friends and allies asking them to call THEIR friends and allies to urge them to call or write their state’s U.S. senators asking for adoption. By Monday morning, March 20, the Senate was inundated with mail and phone calls urging adoption, and, on March 22, 1972 the Equal Rights Amendment was adopted by the Senate.
Notice was given to each of the states that Congress had so acted, and that the clock was running. In Indiana, organizations were mobilizing to work for ratification. The Indiana chapter of NOW (founded by Betty Newcomb from Muncie, Affirmative Action Officer at Ball State) was mobilizing; the newly formed Indiana and the Greater Indianapolis Women’s Political Caucus (IWPC and GIWPC), both organizations co-chaired by Virginia Dill McCarty, a Democrat and prominent attorney in Indianapolis, and Mary Anne Butters, a Republican from Indianapolis and former newspaperwoman on the staff of then Mayor Richard G. Lugar. Other established local groups, including the local units of national organizations that were supporting the ERA, joined the effort as well – the AFL/CIO, Church Women United, the YWCA, and the League of Women Voters to mention only a few.
The women’s political caucuses, by the way, were coalitions of committed democrat and republican feminists working together in the same organization for a common goal, a highly unique occurrence. Though discussions were often heated and verged on the partisan in board meetings, the resulting collaboration proved a successful one in support of the Equal Rights Amendment and other critical legislation.
The first chance to introduce a joint resolution to the Indiana General Assembly would be in the 98th General Assembly, 1973-1974. In the short time left in 1972 before the session began in January 1973, ERA proponents worked feverishly, starting from ground zero, to lay the foundation for introduction and passage. Discussions with legislative and party leaders were under way and a speakers’ bureau was formed to present the Equal Rights Amendment information to existing women’s groups in the state. Membership drives and lobbying seminars were launched in every corner of the state and women and men who supported the amendment formed a strong coalition and active grassroots support of the measure. The legislative members’ probable yeas and nays were toted up and organizations known to be favorable to passage were recruited. A pro-ERA liaison from his/her own district was assigned to each member of the General Assembly to put local pressure on recalcitrant legislators and to support the pro-ERA legislators. They held fundraisers, set up information booths at state and county fairs, courted the news media, and enlisted large numbers of people to their cause. The “basics” were in place. As support grew over the state and, as the ERA forces joined their talents and energy with other well-established organizations with a legislative presence, their effectiveness increased.
In late 1974, the groundwork, education, and media information being established, Hoosiers for the Equal Rights Amendment (HERA), a pro-ERA coalition of organizations supported the lobbying effort led by Virginia Dill McCarty (D, Marion County) and Betty Packard Voris (R., Marion County) members of the Indiana Women’s Political Caucus, both of whom were seasoned politicians. A well-funded operation representing a coalition of over 60 organizations, HERA set up an office across the street from the Statehouse and opened an in-session hospitality room in the nearby Hilton Hotel. Coordination and cooperation existed among the coalition members, some of which provided lighter moments in the midst of a very focused campaign.
As Jill Chambers, then and still a member of NOW, pointed out recently, “We often played ‘Good Guys/Bad Guys’.” NOW was an activist group that, among other methods of persuasion, utilized civil disobedience as a tool. Therefore, when they would picket the Governor’s mansion or otherwise ruffle official feathers, the ERA lobbyists (primarily IWPC members, but operating, of course, under the same HERA umbrella as the NOW contingency) would go to legislative and government leaders and say “Wouldn’t you rather deal with us? See our white hats?” This almost backfired when a truckload of pro-ERA mail ended up on the lawn of a representative from Bloomington who had reneged (in a committee hearing) on a campaign promise to support the ERA. The press thoroughly enjoyed this; it was decidedly NOT humorous, however, to the leadership of the Indiana General Assembly and the pro-ERA lobbyists had some fence-mending to do.
These were the days before e-mail or voicemail; it even pre-dates the wide use of faxes and copy machines. It was, however, crucial to be able to get word out quickly across the state and a statewide “telephone tree” was established that could – and did – produce astounding results in a short period of time. With one well-placed phone call from a telephone booth at the Statehouse, callers in coalition organizations across the state were notified, each “branch” calling the assigned “leaves” in their group. A virtual shower of mail and phone calls could be generated – targeting constituents in one legislator’s home district or creating a flood of constituent mail from all districts to their representatives in the House or Senate.
Pushing a proposal through the Indiana General Assembly is a daunting task; overcoming the deadly inertia of the status quo takes diligent attention to many fronts. While promoting the issues, it is also necessary to keep faith with the legislators who support your side and maintain credibility with the public, partners in your coalition, other lobbyists, and state officials. By 1975, the HERA coalition had gained enough credibility to be sought out by other groups to endorse significant legislation on women’s issues. The pro-ERA lobbyists, then, use their own hard-won influence and were working hand-in-glove with other groups to pass needed women’s rights legislation in Indiana. Indeed, many pro-women’s issues were addressed in the late 1970s. In 1973, ninety-seven Indiana laws on the books with discriminatory language were identified and amended or eliminated.
House Joint Resolution 12, the “proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to equal rights for men and women,” was introduced in the 1973 “long” session of the 98th General Assembly and was adopted by the House of Representatives by a vote of 53 to 45 on February 14, 1973. There is some subtle irony here; quite possibly it was the work of the authors, William S. Latz (R., Fort Wayne) and Clifford D. Arnold (D., La Porte), or, perhaps, Kermit O. Burrous (R., Peru) who, as Speaker, had the power to hand bills down for passage . . . or not. HJR 12 was heard in the House and adopted on Valentine’s Day! Arnold, by the way, was either sponsor or author of the Equal Rights Amendment every session that it was introduced. Neither the Republican nor Democrat Caucuses in the House of Representatives wavered in support of the ERA over the four years it took to achieve ratification, although the overall vote was tight from time to time. Pro- and anti-ERA forces were extremely active in presenting their arguments – in one instance, anti-ERA lobbyists put fresh-baked bread on the desk of each legislator – and no votes could be taken for granted. Conservative legislators, both House and Senate, claimed, generally, that it violated state sovereignty since enforcement was mandated by the resolution to be at the federal level, and was, therefore, a “states’ rights issue”; a second powerful argument suggested that the ERA would “weaken the family structure.”
When ratification by 38 states became a real possibility in early 1974, Phyllis Schlafly of the “Eagle Forum” in Illinois, an influential conservative organization, founded the STOP ERA movement. Schlafly and her followers exploited the fears already lurking in the minds of many people: girls/daughters going to war, unisex bathrooms, nullification of rape laws, and the like. The media and scholarly studies from the early 1980s, however, give Schafly high marks for the successful STOP ERA campaign she mounted. Through her already established information sources, her newsletters and publications targeting women, she provided focus, research, and high visibility for the anti-ERA position that contributed in great measure in securing thirteen states in the “no” column. The press gave the issue excellent coverage especially when the anti-ERA forces geared up and debates between the two factions heated up as attention moved to the marginal, but very emotional, issues.
The fallout in Indiana from the intensified opposition was considerable, though not insurmountable. Evelyn Pitschke (now deceased), legal advisor to both the Eagle Forum and STOP ERA, was an Indianapolis attorney. She and Senator Joan Gubbins (R., Indianapolis) led the anti-ERA movement in Indiana and their efforts eroded some ERA support in the House and almost claimed a crucial vote in the Senate in 1977. By 1976, STOP ERA was in high gear and the national ERA “steamroller” faltered, eventually coming to a dead stop.
The House joint resolution was brought to a vote in the Senate late in the session – April 2nd, 1973 – and was defeated by a vote of 16 to 34. Members of the Senate Republican Caucus continued to block passage of the ERA for the six years it controlled the Senate – three General Assemblies – the 97th, 98th, and 99th; from 1971 through 1976.
Pro-ERA lobbyists squared off against the Senate Republican Caucus which outnumbered the Democrats in the Senate by 30 to 20. The caucus had elected Phillip E. Gutman as President pro tempore and Martin K. Edwards (R., New Castle) as Majority Caucus Leader. James A. Gardner (R., Fowler) was appointed Majority Floor Leader. There was a strong conservative contingency in this caucus and Senator Gubbins led them in opposition to the ERA. Other legislators, republican and democrat, needed those conservative votes to enact other legislation and could not, though perhaps not “against” the ERA, sacrifice votes needed from those conservative republican members for their own priority legislation. Senator Robert D. Garton (R., Columbus; now president pro tempore of the Senate), republican co-sponsor with Philip Hayes (D-Evansville), of the joint resolution to approve the equal rights amendment, was the lone ERA advocate in the Republican Caucus until the November 1976 elections. Garton, as a freshman senator in 1971, had introduced a bill on non-discrimination in the workplace for women and other individuals which passed. He stayed the course and was instrumental in the ratification of the ERA in 1977. The Senate democrats, though having several strong anti-ERA voices, tipped the balance in favor of ratification but never had enough votes to impact passage until 1977 when democrats controlled the Senate.
One of the toughest arguments to counter, in Indiana as well as in other states, was the state's rights stand that claimed the ERA issue as one of those included as not specifically authorized by the Constitution, which, therefore, remains at the discretion of the severak states.
In both the 1973 and 1975 sessions, Senators Gubbins and Clarence Kelley (R., South Bend) introduced an amendment to the state constitution to guarantee equal rights regardless of sex. If successful, that action would circumvent passage of an amendment that had federal “teeth.” This measure was adopted by the Senate on March 12, 1975, on a tie vote broken by Robert D. Orr (R., Evansville), President of the Senate, who cast the deciding vote of “aye” (an “aye” vote for the Gubbins amendment was, in effect, a nullifying vote for the federal amendment). The measure was adopted in the Senate but did not survive the democrat-controlled House committee assignment to Rules and Legislative Procedures. The issue of equal rights for women was dead until the next General Assembly, the 100th, convened in January 1977.
Introduced and adopted by the House in both the 1975 and 1976 session, the joint resolution for approval of the ERA did not, however, survive assignment to the Senate “graveyard committee” chaired by Senator Edwards, Majority Caucus Chairman. In 1975, his Governmental Affairs Committee met to consider the amendment and killed the resolution by an 8 to 5 party-line vote – on Valentine’s Day. That same session, a motion to amend the resolution on second reading was proposed by Senator Garton. The motion to strip another joint resolution (remove its contents and substitute new language) that had already passed out of committee and insert the Equal Rights Amendment was also defeated, 27 to 21. The Indianapolis Star reported that Garton, in requesting the substitution, asked “What is wrong with extending the constitutional rights and privilege to all members of our society? . . .”
During the 1976 elections, now nominating and electing the 100th General Assembly (including the 1977 and 1978 sessions of the General Assembly), pro-ERA activists in the coalition worked to unseat incumbents who were opposed to the ERA. Volunteers worked in the precincts in many cities across the state and, in Evansville, helped J. Richard Harris (R., Evansville), on record as an advocate for women’s rights, win the Senate. He defeated Harry Thompson (R, Evansville), who had voted consistently against the measure and John Larson (R., Lake and Porter), a pro-ERA legislator who had served in the House of Representative, had defeated the democrat incumbent there.
The ultimate battlefield, however, was the Indiana State Senate vote tally board and, finally, in 1977, the hard work of the pro-ERA coalition paid off. In the 100th General Assembly, the House of Representatives was again republican-controlled by a slim margin of 52 to 48 under the leadership of Speaker Kermit Burrous (R., Brazil) and the democrats had won control of the Senate by a slim margin of 6 votes (28 to 22) under the leadership of President pro tempore Robert J. Fair (D, Princeton). Frank O’Bannon (D., Corydon), now governor, chaired the powerful Senate Finance Committee and Senator Martin K. Edwards was elected minority leader of the Senate Republican Caucus. Resigning from my post before the election and now working as a Legal Administrator at an Indianapolis law firm, I was now watching proceedings through the glass windows at the back of the Chambers and assisting the lobbying efforts of the ERA coalition.
On January 12, 1977, the Equal Rights Amendment (now HJR 2) was adopted by the House of Representatives by a vote of 54 to 45 and was again sent to the Senate, now controlled by the democrats. There were a series of legislative maneuvers as HJR 2 made its way through the steps of passage in the Senate. All legitimate, they were attempts to defer the now-imminent passage of the resolution in hopes that the momentum to passage could be stalled. Senator Bruggenschmidt (D., Jasper) introduced a motion to amend on second reading to strip the resolution and insert in lieu thereof the appointment of a study committee to report to the General Assembly before September 1978 and, further, that a referendum on the issue be placed on the ballot for the 1978 general election. The motion was ruled out of order by the chair (President Orr presiding), and the decision of the chair was appealed. Senator Fair presided during the appeal and the resulting vote, yeas 26, nays 23, defeated the stripping attempt and was a harbinger of success at last, Senators Harris and John Larson having joined the Republican Caucus, swaying the vote in favor of ratification.
Senator Thomas J. Teague (D-Marion), Senate sponsor, called HJR 2 down for third reading on the next day, January 18, 1977, in the presence of a tense Senate body and gallery anticipating a close, hard-fought vote. It was less than two weeks into the session – such “fast track” passage was unusual, but crucial because the more time that elapsed before third reading when the bill was placed on passage, the more “yea” votes could become “soft.” Senator W. Wayne Townsend (D., Grant), serving a conservative constituency, began to have second thoughts on his promised “yea” vote. A personal phone call from the First Lady, Rosalynn Carter, in which she promised to visit his district to support him in return for his vote, saved the day. Maureen Reagan visited the Republican legislators and George H. Bush, then head of the Republican National Committee (and later, 41st president) was on record in favor of the amendment and had called the members of the Republican caucus asking each to vote his or her conscience in light of the importance of the issue for women. His careful wording in the conservative caucus didn’t garner any extra votes, but it did shore up the three battle-weary Republicans who would put the Senate ERA vote “in the green.”
One “yea” vote changed to “nay” would have thrown the Senate into a tie (adoption requires 26 votes), which would be broken by the President of the Senate, Lieutenant Governor Orr. Although low-key in his statements about the measure, he had already indicated possible opposition to a federal constitutional amendment to adopt ERA in a key vote in 1975 (he broke a tie vote – the only time a President of the Senate is allowed to vote – in favor of a state level constitutional amendment); a “nay” from the Chair would have defeated the amendment.
Again relying on procedural tactics to defer passage, Senator Edwards introduced a motion (signed by 23 other senators) to defer third reading of HJR 2 until March 15, 1977. The motion was tabled by a roll call vote of 26-24 which was another indication that victory was close at hand. Ratification had been an emotional issue and the strain on legislators was beginning to show. In Senate co-sponsor J. Richard Harris’s closing speech, he said “These have been difficult days and I know well what difficult days they have been . . . . I hope that, when we come back [from the Democrat and Republican caucuses which had been called immediately following the vote] to handle the serious business of this state, the divisiveness of this issue will not reflect in our findings.” The voting machine was opened and the measure passed by a “squeaker” vote of 26 to 24. Senators Garton, Harris, and Larson (R., Lake and Porter) joined twenty-three Democrats in voting yes.
Packed with both anti-ERA representatives wearing big “STOP” signs reading “STOP ERA” and ERA proponents wearing “ERA – YES!!!” buttons, the Senate gallery and the halls beyond the Chambers were teeming with pro- and anti-ERA supporters. When the green lights went up on the board to the total of 26, the gallery and the halls beyond the Chambers exploded with cheers until the President of the Senate gaveled them down. House Joint Resolution 2 became law (Public Law 356) and Congress was so informed. Indiana was the thirty-fifth state to ratify out of a needed thirty-eight.
Personal involvement in a cause is life-changing and, in this instance, the years since have added an historic aspect to those frantic days. Friendships and networking created under the press of a common goal and a deadline every day forges a special bond. For women of the ‘70s, the ERA ratification campaign was a heady experience in empowerment; for women of today and the future, a necessary first-step out into new space that must be taken for progress in any area of endeavor.
P.S. or footnote: There was a short-lived attempt in the 1978 session of the General Assembly to rescind the action whereby the Equal Rights Amendment was ratified in 1977 on the ground that supporters of the ERA made “false and deceptive use of forged letters” in the House that was unsuccessful. There are, however, some interesting recent developments in the battle for the equal rights amendment. There is a legal challenge pending (still pending, 2010) which asserts that the Equal Rights Amendment, as passed by Congress in 1972 and ratified by 35 states, can be declared a constitutional amendment with ratification of three more states, disregarding the time limitation for passage that was negotiated into the joint resolution by Senator Ervin and Representative Cellers over thirty years ago.. The amendment, as adopted by Congress (and Indiana, of course), was introduced in 2002 in the legislatures of five states that did not ratify – Illinois, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Virginia. As of June 2003, the Illinois legislature has adjourned, leaving ratification of the equal rights amendment on the table.
Recommended reading:
Berry, Mary Frances, Why ERA Failed. Indiana University Press. Bloomington 1986.
Held, Allison, Sheryl Herndon, and Danielle Stager “The Equal Rights Amendment: Why the ERA Remains Legally Viable and Properly Before the States,” William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law, Spring 1997.
Hoff-Wilson, Joan, ed. Rights of Passage: The Past and Future of the ERA. Indiana University Press. Bloomington 1986.
Journals of Proceedings: Indiana House of Representatives and Indiana Senate; 1973 through 1977. Indiana State Archives, Indianapolis
Seward, Linda Gail, Ph.D. The Equal Rights Amendment Campaign in Indiana: A Study of Ideas and Arguments Purdue University, 1991. (dissertation)
Walsh, Justin, The Centennial History of the Indiana General Assembly, 1816-1978. Indiana Historical Bureau, Indianapolis 1987.
Women’s Collection, Indiana Historical Society Library, Indianapolis, Indiana.
About the Author:
A writer, Beth Van Vorst Gray is the author of A Look Back: Examining the Past and Celebrating the Present (1995), a history of The Health Foundation of Greater Indianapolis, and a number of articles published under the name Beth Van Vorst Greene. Currently president of the board of directors, Indiana Women’s History Association, she was a board member of the Greater Indianapolis Women’s Political Caucus (GIWPC) from 1972-1974 and Principal Secretary of the Indiana State Senate from 1970 through 1976. She is immediate past president of the Indiana Women’s History Association, dedicated to preserving the manuscripts and memorabilia of women in all walks of life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)