Interview number A-0263 in the Southern Oral History Program Collection (#4007) at The Southern Historical Collection, The Louis Round Wilson Special Collections Library, UNC-Chapel Hill. Julius H. Baggett Interview Subject: Julius H. Baggett Interviewer: Jack Bass Date: February 21, 1974 Location: unknown restaurant Topics: Julius H. Baggett [b.1925], Majority Leader of the South Carolina House of Representatives, reflects on creation of th Democratic caucus, rise of the Republican Party, and increasing participation of blacks in South Carolina politics. Transcriber: Dorothy Hazelrigg, Modern Political Collections, The South Caroliniana Library, The University of South Carolina, February 1999 Note: This interview is held by The University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. A copy of the tape was provided to the Moder Political Collections Division of the University of South Carolina's South Caroliniana Library for transcription.
Bass Interview of Julius Baggett, p.2 [Begin Tape, Side 1]...Democratic majority leader of the House. That's right. And the fact that he is such a thing, and there is a Democratic Caucus in the House, certainly reflects change, because twenty-five years ago, the House was all Democrats, there was no such. How did a Democratic Caucus come about, and why? What has it done? How does it work? It came about by the thinking of a good many members of the House that we were, I think, in many instances trying to lose a political identification in many instances, because the issues at many of the times were rather critical and that it was convenient, I think, in many instances to try to avoid identification. But, we were finding ourselves being victimized by not being identified and not being organized to meet head on legislation that did have political implications. I guess all legislation has some of it, but there are some things that, on a given occasion, represent themselves, that make political issues and we were quite often not doing things in the best interest of politics. Of course, I think that good government is the best kind of politics. Nothing better than you can demonstrate your capability, that's your best kind of politics. But a group of us got together and came up with the idea of this Democratic organization, and we had read where the Republican party in the House had organized by election of a minority leader and some other offices, and their number had increased to twentythree, which was not anything that was alarming, but we felt that we needed to get ourselves organized, not only because of the pure politics involved, but because we thought it would give us an extra dimension to the legislative process, where we could get together and share our views on different issues and try to work out some acceptable compromises without going through all the big, long hassles on the floor of the House. And so, we did this in late January of last year. As a matter of fact, I sent it out under my signature, a letter calling for a meeting of the Democrats in the House to consider the question of organizing. And we then met, and a steering committee was appointed to write up the bylaws, and we did that and came back and it was accepted. Did everybody join? Our bylaws provided anyone who is nominated in a Democratic primary is automatically a member. The way he gets out is he notifies the majority leader that he doesn't wish to become a member. Have there been any such notices? No. Presumably, anybody who declares himself to be a Republican is automatically.
Bass Interview of Julius Baggett, p.3 That's right....unattached? Yes. Do you refer to it as "the Caucus?" No, not really. There was some objection to calling it a caucus and so we actually call it "the Democratic Conference" of the House. Does it function in any sort of a...? Not on what you would call a regular operating basis. More often, we have... Have you met this year? Yes, we met. We met as a group, the entire group. I think it was last of January, I believe it was, we met, and tried to determine the key issues we wanted to regard as "must" legislation, to be sure that we got them out, and to work towards that goal. And we did that. We have a representative, on what might be regarded as an executive committee, one from each judicial circuit. There are sixteen of those, and the four officers, we constitute sort of an executive committee. We are apt to meet more often, to try to determine what if any party action should be taken on a particular legislation. If we do, in fact, have a position we want to suggest to our membership, you pass the word out. In other words, informally, we just meet and then... Have you taken a position on any legislation this year? No, we haven't, no, no. One thing that we did as a caucus was to suggest that the majority leader try to set the pace for the sessions, that is to say, if the majority leader thinks that matters that need to be attended in session, then he tries to keep them in session. So that, in a given situation, the majority leader will make the motion to adjourn. That would try to be a signal that, okay, you know, we ought to go. But this is done after we talk with the Speaker, or we may consult with a committee chairman, that the wisest thing to do would be to stay in session, or could be that we need to recess, to work out a problem. We did this last year, for example, on the interest bill, where they want to increase the interest. We had a filibuster going, and so we called for a recess and held a little caucus with the interested parties, worked out the differences between them, and got it through. But you made the [mole?] motion? Yes. And when that happened, there wasn't a response?
Bass Interview of Julius Baggett, p.4 Generally speaking, that's right. In that particular instance, and... I think last year, wasn't there agreement reached within the conference on the $ 1.4 million appropriation for social services out of the surplus? Yes. Among other things. Among other items. What other items? I think the appropriations you have referenced to has to do with money for day care centers. We also sponsored an increase for the amount returned to the school districts for overhead and supervision. We reached an accord on the primary capital improvements that we wanted. In other words, we restructured some portions of the appropriations bill. And it worked, we saved the schools and hung together on it and we got it through in that fashion. So when the conference has met in the past, how long is the meeting for? Oh, very short. If you consider that you're talking about special meetings on legislation, we're not apt to stay in session more than about thirty minutes. How about the meeting this year... The one we had this year lasted about an hour. As I said prior, the bill is... Is there any provision for liaison with the governor's office, or the Senate, structured into the conference? Yes, that's one of the stated functions of this caucus is that we do try to maintain we haven't had the opportunity or the need particularly in the case of the Senate, but we have on some occasions had it with the governor. How does that work? I mean, does he call you in, or do you ask to see him? Oh, I think on one or two occasions, he has sent word to me through one of his aides, or he has called me and I've gone down, he's called me on the telephone once, and I've gone down to see him, and it's a very loose kind of thing, but I'm available. But he recognizes you as being the majority leader? Yes. And has worked through you in effect to at times. On the few occasions that it was necessary. Do you think this will grow more in the future?
Bass Interview of Julius Baggett, p.5 Yes. This is all very new. We started out with this thing and we wanted it to be a very loose type organization. Did you copy it after anyone else's? No, we researched it, we looked at what the caucuses in the Congress were. We didn't have a thing to go on as far as state organizations are concerned. We got the rules and bylaws of the Democratic and Republican caucuses in Congress, and I had a conversation with Congressman [William Jennings Bryan] Dorn, and he described the way the caucus worked in the Congress, and was very much in favor of our going into this and encouraged it. We're not trying to be any kind of a militant organization. We make no pretense that we're not anxious to preserve Democratic rule in the House, and that we are interested in re-electing or electing people from the Democratic party, and this is, I guess you might say, one of our primary goals. We haven't had any experience in that field yet, because we haven't been through an election yet. But we've got one coming up, and we hope to be able to help in whatever way we can to project what we hope will be a good image of the Democratic leadership in the House. Will there be any further [opening?] up as far as elections are concerned? Any fund raising activities? Yes, I would hope so. I would hope so. There may be particular needs in some areas, more so than others. I presume then the conference would be taking no role whatsoever insofar as the primaries? No, no, none whatever. Because I think in Congress there are such things as Democratic and Republican fund raising committees. Yes. Do you see the conference here doing that sort of thing? I guess so, eventually. A lot depends upon the degree of participation or competition with the Republican Party and the success that they might have had. The more success they might have, the more active we're going to have to get in that area. Senator Hollings was chairman of a committee for re-election of Democrats or something of this sort. And he helped to raise money and the committee allocated it among the different candidates. So I see this as being a vehicle for that. Do you see the conference playing any role insofar as determining committee assignments? Yes, I would hope so.
Bass Interview of Julius Baggett, p.6 Has the Speaker taken a position on that? Have you discussed it with him? No, we haven't pressed the point. I think our role would at the outset simply be one of counseling with the Speaker on assignments. Obviously, under the rules we have nothing officially to do with it. Through the conference? That's right. And, of course, the conference could eventually become a major influence in the election of the Speaker, as it is in the Congress. That is where it's actually decided, as you well know. In the majority conference of the Congress is where it's all done, and I think that eventually it might come into play here. Depending upon, here again, how much Republican success is had. Because at this point, the Republicans, theoretically, could form a coalition with a dissident pack of Democrats. Yes. Did the conference play any role or take a position or was a position taken within the conference by the Democrats, insofar as setting up the state level GAO, governmental accounting office? I really couldn't claim any credit for the organization on that. Now Republicans couldn't, at least, claim credit for that idea. They didn't originally. They say they did. I know for a fact that Representative Yarborough from Orangeburg had a bill that was introduced and referred to Ways and Means committee, as did [Republican Minority Leader] Marshall Cain. That bill became the committee bill of the Ways and Means Committee. You're talking about this year, or... This year. They said they first came up with the idea in 1971. Oh, I don't think they could really claim credit for that. It's nothing new, we've discussed it before. I don't really think they could take credit for it. [There is a] Democratic majority on the Ways and Means Committee that reported it out of the bill. They certainly could've killed it had they not wanted it.
Bass Interview of Julius Baggett, p.7 In the event of single-member districts, in the House, Republicans believe they're going to win a lot more seats. I think they're correct. One of the reasons they think they're going to do it is in the certain number of Democratic incumbents who're going to switch parties when single districts come in, districts set up. Do you think this is going to come out [that way?]? That's a possibility. I don't look for that on any large scale. I'm not quite sure what success it will have. That might work in case of a statewide candidate, at a given time, depending upon the situation at that time, particularly if you had some apparently good excuse for doing it. But a man would be rather hard-pressed to have no reason to justify his switching when he finds himself in a predominantly Republican neighborhood. They may do it. I don't know. I don't think that's going to be the reason for their gaining seats, I think just the simple fact that they're going to be districted out where you do have historically strong Republican districts. So it'll be self-executing. I guess the question is whether or not Democrats who find themselves in such districts will likely switch. I think there might be rare instances of that. I don't know that any large scale... I think they're a very rare thing, protecting only the. What effect do you think Watergate is going to have in South Carolina insofar as Republican party development? I think Watergate will detract from Republican growth. I attended a meeting in Greenwood one night and a man came there who had been a Republican this was a Democratic meeting and he got up and addressed the organization and said that he had not really taken an active part in politics but after all that had been going on, he felt like he'd better get in and take some part, or he really couldn't be heard to complain. He was an acknowledged Republican. Of course, as you know, the growth of the Republican party in this state was at a given time some cause celebre, that people felt that there was a panacea by becoming a Republican, that in the act you became suddenly more righteous. The Republican Party, of course, is composed of dissident Democrats. It became so primarily at the outset by reason of national politics. That's where they came from. Now, how long that kind of dissension will hold to keep them in the Republican Party remains to be seen. I rather think that it's going to detract, I think there are going to be Democrats coming back home, I really do. So you think there are going to be Democrats who switched to the Republican party coming back? Yes.
Bass Interview of Julius Baggett, p. What do you think will be the effect on people who have been [George] Wallace Republicans in this state? Two questions one, do you see any effect of Watergate on them specifically, and two, where do you think they're going in the future? Of course, Watergate is going to have an effect on all politicians. I think to a greater degree on Republicans. But Watergate has created an aura of distrust, I think, for most elected officials. And, I don't think that we Democrats can take an awful lot of comfort out of it, because that attitude may well extend itself to every elected official. Now, when you talk about the place of the Wallace supporters, of course, as you well know that has not had any play on local elections that I've been able to detect. I noticed where their champion was now in the Democratic primary, or declaring himself he was going to be in the Democratic primary for governor. Do you think that's going to result in, in a sense, a boost to the Democratic party? Yes, I think so. I think that they may well decide that they will maybe come back into the Democratic Party and try to form a more common ground to work within what is an effective party organization. I think people... Do you see them working with blacks? Yes, I think so. Economic coalitions? Economic coalitions? I'm not so sure about that. What is it that would attract a lot of voters and black [voters?] to the Democratic Party? Number one, a political party should be able to carry out some of this, policies and objectives. It should be able to elect people. It should be able to sponsor legislation that is enacted into law. Without these positive concrete products, I don't see how a political party can continue simply on some abstract philosophy. People are going to want to be in the party that is active and succeeds at electing people and puts things through. Put what kind of things through? Whatever it is they may be after. The Democratic Party, in this state, of course had, I think, a substantial transformation. I'm just amazed, frankly, when I see how well that so many different groups and factions can be accommodated within it. And I think that is by and large its strength, that it denies no one anymore, that it's open to everybody. We don't try to condemn people for any past errors so to speak, when they may have left the party and what have you. It's amazing. I've been to state conventions here several years now, where there's just been this transformation, where we elect a black vice-president, where we elect, I think, a goodly proportion of blacks to the national convention. We had them on county organizations [and] precinct levels. I think it's a good healthy sign where people can have an opportunity to express
Bass Interview of Julius Baggett, p.9 their views, and while they may not always be accepted, at least you can be heard. Do you think politicians in this state will be more aggressive in racial attitudes than the public as a whole? I'm not so sure. Because the politicians, to a great extent, are a reflection of the attitude of the people back home that they represent. Now, I grant you that particularly on the race issue, that politician no doubt knows more about the hopes and aspirations of the blacks than does the ordinary person that he represents, who is not black. To that extent, maybe he is more liberal, but I'm not so sure that it'd be the kind of liberality which his constituents would object to. Is this a direct result of the campaigning process itself? I mean does sensitivity? Yes, yes. I think so, definitely. Candidates for public office undergo an educational process? No question about it. No question about it. I did. Give me some experiences. What happened during you did? All right. A few years ago, I was politicking, I was asked to attend a meeting at a black church at home, which was just a couple of weeks before the election. This was a meeting where representatives from all of the other black churches in the county were attending. Their purpose was to hear from the candidates for all local elections and find out, wanted to ask them some questions and see what they had to say. I was afraid to go to the meeting, and I inquired as to whether or not my opponent was going. And they said no, that he would not be there. And I inquired as to whether or not any other candidates for any other office were going to be there, and they said they weren't sure. And so, the invitation came to me, not in the mail or anything else, it came to me by sort of a phone call from one of the blacks, said we'd sort of like for you to be there, and I didn't even quite understand what it was all about. But when I did finally comprehend it, I was afraid of the white reaction to my going to such a meeting. And so I didn't go. And the irony of it all was I lost that election. I'm quite sure that had I gone, that I would have won the election. I lost the election by about three hundred and fifty votes. And I didn't have a doubt in my mind that had I gone, and talked to them, I could've done it. So, since that time, I never turn down an invitation to go and speak to them anyplace. And I feel so much better about it. I have a very good rapport with them, and I try to speak straight to them. I don't try to mislead them and try to twist my views to conform to theirs in every instance, but I try to be honest with them, and tell them how I stand on a given issue. And has this resulted in any change in your attitudes? In my attitudes? Very definitely. I like to feel that I have, for the most part, ridden myself of any racial bigotry. I don't regard myself as a crusader to any extent, but I hope that I'm at a point where my mind is open and I'm not closing it because it's a racial problem, and I don't have any hesitation about supporting the black issue. I just feel good about it. It's been a
Bass Interview of Julius Baggett, p.10 purifying process. I'm just not hung up on these kind of things anymore. To what extent does race still play a role in politics? Twenty-five years ago V.O. Key wrote that if you understood the role of the Negro you understood Southern politics is that truth still true? And implied in the question is that the role of the Negro itself has changed. The role of the Negro definitely has changed. The black vote in this state is a tremendous influence. I think it will be an even bigger influence in the future, as they organize better. So I'm not quite sure anybody really understands the position or the attitude of blacks, because I've been fooled on many occasions, when I thought I did, when I really didn't. Sometimes the attitude is not always well-defined, sometimes a little bit vague. [Side 1 ends. Begin Side 2.] I think everybody would probably presume that every black would be opposed to capital punishment. And that's not so. Because some that I have talked to, they're very much in favor of it. And I know from my experiences as a trial lawyer, where we have many blacks on our juries at home, that if you think a black man is going to come closer to acquitting a black man charged with a crime, you're making a bad mistake. They will come quicker towards doing it than a white man will. That was one lesson that I learned, that they're very severe in their judgments on their fellow blacks. Do you think that is a reflection more testament influence [nature?]? No, I don't think so. Could be. I think what it really is, they don't want blacks messing up an improved image. That they regard this as a strike against the whole race. That they been trying to develop a showing of propriety, trying to gain in the esteem of the white man, here comes along a black man that messes that up. And they're more harsh, by far, in their judgments on their own kind than the white man is. I'll give you an illustration about how times change. The first state convention I attended, of course, we had an all-white delegation from my county. This was when? 1960. So, I came back to South Carolina from Atlanta, Georgia. I'd been with the government, for the Department of Agriculture over there after I'd finished with law school. I came back to South Carolina in 1958, took me two years to get again in South Carolina, back then. So I attended the state convention in 1960. 1964, we went to the convention, and we had some blacks on it. 1968, we were about evenly divided. The remarkable thing was, we not only had them on there, we enjoyed having meals with them, sat down and broke bread with them, which was something that you just would not have thought of doing earlier. They enjoyed it, we enjoyed it. An old fellow at home, who went for the first time and experienced this, and he must have been seventy years old, still remarks about it. What a grand time he had. It was the highlight of his entire life, was doing this.
Bass Interview of Julius Baggett, p.11 Kind of a liberating influence? Yes. That's what I'm talking about, because the more you can experience these kind of things, and get to know people, and do away with suspicion, just accept them as a fellow man, it's a great feeling. I'm not trying to be sanctimonious. I think you understand me though. It's a good thing for your intellect. It just helps to remove a lot of clouds, and helps your thinking. I have supported measures that I just never would have known, before. What would be an example of that? Oh, I was an advocate for day care centers, I'm an advocate of housing, financing by the state, I supported registration by mail though I'm not quite sure that that's a black proposition. In principle, I'm against capital punishment. For the same reasons that they are against it, but I have additional reasons from a legal standpoint, that we don't need to get into. So, the only way that I could support it would be on a very narrow, limited basis. I just came around to single-member districting, and the reapportionment plan, fall side-by-side with the blacks in the House, plotted with them, planned with them. [Tape stopped, then resumes.]...just in general, I see what I regard as a very wholesome change in the attitude of politicians. It's one of better relations with the blacks. I think it's one of a more progressive outlook on things. We are going to have to move out in a bolder manner to meet with our current problems. They must be recognized, and we're going to have to try to handle them to the limit of our resources, so that by doing this we can increase our resources, go back and work with some more problems. I think the attitude is very good. I think it's one of progress that we are trying now, I think, to face these problems instead of ignoring them. In all kind of areas. I think it's a very good sign. Where do you see the Democratic Party heading in South Carolina? I think it's going to continue its leadership position, I don't see any real threat on it. I think the Democratic Party will probably liberalize. I think it's going to become more viable, really. Because I like what I see. I think we're getting more participation, combinations of different views, a searching out of the problems in an honest effort to deal with them. I feel that there's going to be a whole lot more honesty in the approach in Democratic politics. We're not going to try to take any advantage of the racial situation either plus or minus, but instead we're going to, for lack of a better term, going to embrace the problem, and let it work towards improvement in many of our problems. Now a lot of what you've said has sort of suggested that as politicians become more exposed to the politics of race as it now exists, the changed role of race, it has resulted in an educational process that has resulted in greater awareness of a lot of other issues that have been submerged, an awareness to tackle that. I mean, am I phrasing that properly?
Bass Interview of Julius Baggett, p.12 I think that's right. You can't serve with black legislators, if you're going to be honest, and ignore them. What I mean to say is, what they've got to say. Whether you're talking to them privately, which I like to do, or whether you're listening to them and the position they're taking on the floor of the House. You can't ignore it. I think that has been a good experience. So that the very fact that you have blacks in the legislature itself has been an educational experience for both of them? No question about it. No question about it. I've become very close to a lot of them. I think we're friends. We can talk just as freely as you and I are talking. Is this one reason for the image of greater conservatism in the Senate? I suspect that might have something to do with it. I'd never thought of that before. I think that might have something to do with it. [Interview ends]