colleagues from all criticism by silence on issues that are really public matters. Will you go that far in the tradition of being a colleague and a member of the club? “I am in favor of open hearings on nominations. The United States Senate abolished closed hearings in 1929. If they can do it on the secretary of state and the other cabinet members, surely we can. “Garwood is a statewide figure one of our leading intellectuals, one of our leading citizens, one of our leading jurists, widely accepted by everybody in Texas who knew him. If this kind of man can be busted by the Senate without a word of public discussion about his character or qualifications, and without ever giving him an opportunity to answer, then I don’t think we’ll ever be able to get this kind of man for this kind o _f position. “If we need to talk about Atlantic Union on Garwood, let’s talk. about it . . . or the U.N. . . . Let’s ask him what affiliations he has senators don’t like. But let’s have a public airing of these things, because the people have got a right to know. We’re not organized so that we can be satisfied. There’s more to it than that. The people have got to be satisfied with the governor’s nominees. “The governor and 21 senators-22 peoplecould get into a position to appoint people of one kind, right or left, td every office in Texas, and the rest of the senators would be bound to secrecy. I just don’t think nine and a half million people oughta be faced with the remotest possibility that it could happen.” IN THE FUTURE, the Senator said, “I’m gonna participate in the .executive sessions. I’m not gonna report any remarks that touch on the character or the qualifications 16 The Texas Observer JP of the nominee. But I’ve drawn this line beyond which I won’t go on the fraternal basis. I’m gonna answer any questions other than that at the end of any executive session. I will tell any vote that I know -about. . . . I think what I see and hear among 31 people will stay with me.” Has he heard talk about his expulsion from the Senate? “My friends in the Senate have indicated to me that they were worried about it, but I really can’t believe there are 21 members of the Senate who would vote to expel a member for a legal interpretation of a Senate rule. I think two years ago, in the same situation, somebody could’a got up and said, ‘Mr. President, I move to expel the senator from Galveston,’ and very easily get 21 votes, but this new bunch, no matter how much some of us might disagree politically, are conscious about the rights of other people and can’t be stampeded into agreements that were _made before they arrived. I believe they will give me the privilege of regulating my future conduct according to my conscience and what the rule says.” Why has he taken the risk? “In my opinion, this is the most fundamental thing that government can do. How we _ vote is important to constituents. They can throw us in or throw us outbut they’ve got a right to know how we vote. Basically isn’t that the most important right of the public, knowing how we vote? A man can make a lot of speeches and say this and that. They don’t give a damn what I say out here,” he said, Waving to the Senate floor, where his colleagues were holding forth. “They want to know what I’m gonna do out there. That’s the only protection the public’s got.” What would he do if he was expelled? “Oh, I’d run for re-election again !with the certainty that I’d come back. I’d just go back and run. I don’t believe it would serve any purpose. On a long-term basis it might be damaging to me. But I think it might be damaging to the Senate, too. “There are some who think that I owe the obligation to the Senate to continue this tradition. That’s why I said the other day, the Senate did not elect me to the Senate, but I always expect to be in position where I can be elected to the Senate by the people. It’s not like obligations to a –social club when you’ve been elected to that social order. That’s a damn important distinction. When I’m elected to a club, the club elects me to the club. “I’ve been blackballed before,” Senator Schwartz said. “It’s no new experience for me, because I’m a nonconformist and everybody knows it. I don’t remember whether it was Cowboys or Spurs at the University of Texas . . . I know the honorary law society, I was advised I had been proposed for membership, and I was not invited. “This is just the fountainhead of a lot of things that go into the makeup of my personality. I’m pretty obviously a nonconformist. Somebody might say I’ve got the minority complex.” [Senator Schwartz is a Jew.] “When you get it is when you suddenly come to realize that there might not be anybody else to make the fight. I’m willing to let somebody fight for me that’s human, we all are. But when you realize that nobody else will make the fight, then you’ve got to decide whether you’re willing to make it yourself.” Does he think his legislation will be given a fair run by his colleagues? “I really do. I may be naive. There are some few people around here who might oppose some of my bills on a personal basis . . . but let’s face it, they’re opposed to the bills, anyway. “Now if it carries over into my local bills, where I know it would have to be a personal matter, then I’ll have to decide whether to do something about that. And I think, based on previous experience,” said Senator Schwartz with a very game laugh, “you can pretty well know that I will.” R.D.
You May Also Like
The documentary in Falfurrias is sinister and spiritual.