Editor's note: Paul Greenberg, former editorial page editor of the Pine Bluff Commercial and retired editorial page editor and columnist for the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette and columnist for the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, won a Pulitzer Prize in 1969 for a series of editorials he wrote in 1968 on civil rights. Greenberg described the editorials during an interview once as being about the "need for understanding and the respect for the rights of others." We believe those sensibilities are worthy of review again, considering the racial protests and other turmoil in the country today. For that reason, we are republishing each of Mr. Greenberg's award-winning editorials over the next several days. He died April 6 at age 84.
In all, Greenberg submitted seven "exhibits" to be considered for the Pulitzer. This segment, which was submitted as "EXHIBIT 7," said: "The Commercial devoted a number of editorials in 1968 to examining the case and appeal of Freedom, Inc., which launched a campaign to oppose the local school board. Three members of Freedom, Inc., have filed for the school board election coming up soon, and the controversy shows no sign of cooling. Neither, we hope, will the Commercial's vigilance."
EXHIBIT 7 (Part I)
Freedom, Inc., Gets Here, Oct. 1, 1968.
(Subtitled "The Zebras Win 3 to 3.")
The chapter of Freedom, Inc., formed last weekend in Pine Bluff is no ragtag group with some new flimsy cure-all for school integration. It is composed of well-respected and well-known people who have now been interested in a flimsy cure-all for school integration.
The newest talisman against integration in the public schools is called the Whitten Amendment. It would forbid the Department of Health, Education and Welfare to withhold federal funds from local school districts in order to force integration.
This latest mirage to come down the pike won't work any better than standing in the schoolhouse door. Because: Even if the Whitten Amendment makes it past Congress without being changed, even if it is signed into law by the President, and even if by some magical transformation HEW's lawyers suddenly say that they have been forcing integration rather than merely setting standards that local school districts voluntarily adhere to, even then the Whitten Amendment can be challenged in the federal courts.
AND THE COURTS have ruled that Freedom-of-Choice plans are unacceptable "if there are reasonably available other ways, such for illustration as zoning, promising speedier and more effective conversion to a unitary, nonracial school system..."
And the federal courts have a way of being more arbitrary and less flexible than HEW ever was in these matters. So that in the end, in all likelihood, the community and the school system would be faced by the same challenge--only with less money and less local control to meet it.
FREEDOM, INC. is now circulating petitions asking the school board to consider Freedom-of-Choice "as the proper method of student placement in our school system." The school board, of course, has not only considered Freedom-of-Choice but did in fact use it for years to determine school placement. Even for next year, the school board wanted to continue with something less than a totally integrated school system. But HEW would not accept that plan as within the requirements of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
So for next year, the school board decided not only to establish one, unitary high school, but to desegregate grades 1 through 9 so that each school would have approximately the same ratio of white to black students. (About 60-40.)
The only practical alternative was to go to a strict neighborhood school policy, with those students living closest to Merrill or Carver or Southeast going to those schools. This policy would have placed greater strain on some neighborhoods than others, inviting divisions, antagonisms and instability. The school board chose the more just and far-sighted policy of integrating each school at approximately the same rate.
WHAT WOULD BE the practical effect now of going back to Freedom of Choice?
The school district would jeopardize at least $500,000 in federal aid. IT would take a tax raise of some 10 additional mills above the current 47 to bring in some $500,000 to maintain school services.
To take the matter out of HEW's hands would be to invite a law suit on constitutional grounds. Such a suit would cost money, time and not do very much to keep the community united and amicable.
And in the end, the courts would be likely to judge this case the same way: That unless Freedom-of-Choice brings integration effectively, it is illegal. And the integration of Pine Bluff's schools might be left to a distant and peremptory federal judge rather than experienced, knowledgeable and local school officials.
And finally, Freedom of Choice conceivably could lead to effective integration anyway by continuing to attract ever-increasing numbers of Negro children to predominately white schools. Which Freedom-of-Choice would have to do and do speedily in order to stay legal by the courts' standards.
PINE BLUFF'S next school year will be one of challenge and transition. But it may be a good deal easier and better than trying to go backward. Given the probable effects of reviving Freedom-of-Choice, and considering fairness to all, the school board's decision was the balanced and practical one.
So the best thing for all citizens, particularly well-know and well-respected ones, would be not to undercut the local school board but to support it.
