Minneapolis spokesman. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1934-2000, 1953-02-13

naiaa6on wnn that % was thought
that tn bin would have . better
chance 90 passing n that section
% the hlll were laft out.
This set off objections spear
headed by an editorial In the
sPokBsMAN and RECORDER
newspapers and the Minneapolis
Urban League and the NAACP.
Their contention was that tho
omission considerably weakened
the bills and that II was bad
strategy 20 weakened bill before II
was necessary.
They pointed out that some Of
tho most vocal opponents Of
F'EPC would be opposed 10 II no
matter how weak the bill was.
A. the last session Of the leg
ialature, In 1901. the bin was tho
cause Of many q frey debate be-
fore II was defeated, II IL expect.
ID that there win be quite . bit
of controversy over the bill at
this session Of the legislature be-
fore tho fate Of tho bill 10 de-
clded.
DuFinw tho 1851 session Tho ban
was h ~ committees bcfore u
was flnnlly defeated.
A. the request Of SomH Of the
authors Of the bin Al the last sss.
sion o. the legislature, thu Min
nesoaA FnPC council chnnged Ma
name 10 Employment on Merit.
the name Of thu nav bill.
THIS wMs dena because 10 was
thought that the blIi would havs
n lsttrE chance % passing undgT q
leaa controversial titin.
II was pointed out that FEPC
has become some kind Of '1boogey
man" especially with rural lagiala-
tors. and with q nsw name u 10
hoped that m0rs support Cor the
bIIi could BE- gained In the lsgisla-
ture,
chief oppononts Of ths btu. most.
ly southern Minnesota tanners.
concentrate on soaring rural leEis.
Iat0rS on tho MEASURE.
A. Tuesday mornings hearings.
proponents Of the bin win be given
one hour 10 testify In behalf Of the
blu.
II IL expected that five persons
Will speak in its bshalf
Editors Netsi Heiectlon u tho
i've speakers whO win speak for
Tire bill win bo d0ne NJ q nlssting
% the eHsoHtive board of TIE Slin-
nssota C0unciI for EmpIoyWsnt on
Merit. THIS nsgtinK took place
after We went 20 pTess.D
Otto Christensen. executive sec
Rotary Of the Minnssota Employ
srs association, 10 expected 10 b.
chlsf spokesman for the opponents
Of the hin RE has been the most
vocal opponent Of the bill IN the
past and 10 leading the fight
against ths bll1 at this session of
the IeGiSlaturs.
oppOnsntS Of thu bill are 81.
psctsd % testify before the senate
judiciary committee on Feb. II.
Dates for hearings on the bin In
the hOuss hsvsn't been cat yet.
but Representative p. X. Peter
son, one % ths co-authors. said
that hs expected hearings In the
house. would follow thoss In thu
senate shortly.
Rep. c. Langley tIOth diSt) CO.
author, has written an amend
msnt that he IL going 10 submit 70
the hOuss labor COMMITTEES, the
Whsrs first hsarinEs on the bin
win b heard. that win have the
FEPc hearings BE- heard BY the
state labor cOBeillatoTa office.
LAnKisy's reasoning II ons Of
economy. Hs maintains that his
msthOd win ave the stats money
the new commission. n set up
and that ths proposed Law, with
out his aEnsndment. the new com
mission. n ct up. win cost ths
stats $4,000.
Veteran political observers are
Of the opinion that the bin has ths
best chance Of passing this session
Of the legislature than II has even
had since II was first introduced
In 1877.
Thsy attribute this 10 the nsw
Republican administration n
washingt0n and Eisenhower
position Of urging the states d
act on FEPC.
Monday mornings TRIBUNE
carried an editorial urging pas
says Of ths bfli. IN which ne,