 I'm Charlotte Ann Lucas, the executive director of Nowcast SA, a non-profit, non-partisan news organization in San Antonio, and today I have the great pleasure to be talking to former congressman Charlie Gonzales about a history-making fight by his father Henry V. Gonzales against segregation bills in the Texas legislature in 1956. While many of us remember Henry V. as he was known for his 37 years in the U.S. House of Representatives in Congress and in 1956 he was the first Hispanic elected to serve in the Texas Senate and he did some remarkable work there and Charlie, you remember what he did. You know very well and thank you very much for having me and for remembering dad and his great work, but dad was elected in November of 1956 to the shock of many, many people because at that time you're a senatorial district in the big counties obviously. He covered all of Bear County in for Mexican-American because it was an Hispanic, Latino, Latina, Latinx. It was Mexican-American to be elected in a county-wide race was beyond belief and to the state senate was in many eyes of people pretty objectionable, but he was quite a surprise, but he was dad's hard work and so he gets elected in 1956 and so to put things in context on May 17th, 1954 we had the Supreme Court case of Brown versus Board of Education of Copica. We know what Brown versus Board means and that was you are going to desegregate our public schools. That was not a welcomed decision by any measure in all parts of the United States, but especially in Texas and your southern states, so dad gets elected. Now you got to figure out it's now 1957 and the state legislature is meeting. Dad is a freshman, but he's joined by some individuals in that senate such as state senator at that time, Chick Payson. Abraham Chick Payson represented Laredo in the state senate, but I think it's so important if people understood the times and that is if you were a minority you really had to come together to have your voice heard. Lebanese Americans, Jewish Americans, Blacks, and of course Hispanics usually were clustered in the same areas of the city. So what happens when the legislature is meeting in 1957? They will continue to try to enact Jim Crow laws. Jim Crow laws were those laws that were enacted after the Civil War to afford the progress of what had been previous slaves and that was the African Americans in this country to equality and full rights. And along with any minorities such as African Americans at that time, you found all the others, the ones I just mentioned, and especially Mexican Americans in the state of Texas. So dad gets up there and the first thing is that the legislature has a whole slate of bills that were proposed by an advisory council that was formed by the previous governor who was going out of office, Alan Shivers, the infamous Shivercraft. And so this committee made certain recommendations and these were horrible bills to perpetuate segregation, inequality, and discrimination. And so they made their way out of the house and a certain number came to the floor in the state Senate. And I believe dad's filibuster, the first filibuster would have been May 2nd, 1957. Chickasen led the filibuster. Few people give him any credit for what he did, which is truly heroic. And he had 11 hours on the floor and then my father had 22 hours. And the rules back then, of course, if you couldn't eat, you couldn't drink anything, and you couldn't go to the rescue. And it was incredible. But of all the bills that were proposed, they were able to defeat a majority of them. And we can get into the particulars of these things. But these bills, given where we are today and the progress that we made are so abhorrent to the very principle of justice and fairness. But I mean, it's still going on. It's just more sophisticated. But they even had a bill that basically would borrow individuals and pay a consequence for belonging to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. It actually, let me read what it said. It was truly amazing. It said that you could not work for the state of Texas if you belong to the NAACP. So it banned state employees from membership in the NAACP. Any member of the NAACP is automatically prohibited from employment by the state of Texas for as long as they maintain their membership with the NAACP. That was House Bill 32. And the other bills paid an awful lot of attention to desegregation of schools, as you said, since it came after Brown versus Board of Education said that you could not do separate but equal. But you know, a couple of the bills did make their way out. And it was, it was troubling. And the ones that even made their way out, if you look at them, and I'm looking now, and it required local option elections before a school could desegregate. You imagine who is going to win that election. And the other allowed for pupil placement input. And it would be based on health, morals, psychology, and intelligence factors, which would then allow basically segregation to continue. And you'd say, we didn't do it on race. We did it on these other factors. So things were under put that were really crazy and outrageous. I was remiss in the beginning of this to not say that that you followed your father in the 23rd Congressional District as a congressman. After he was there, you were there for quite a while. And also you have your law degree and have been a judge. And so that's part of why your recitations of Brown versus Board of Education and the other laws are so important here and articulate. And then I think you may have said the 23rd, but it's the 20th district, which historically has always been the very hard. It used to be all of their county, most of San Antonio, but as things grew and reapportionment and the census every 10 years. But it's still the, to me, it's the San Antonio District, because it's self-contained in San Antonio. And following me, Joaquin Castro has just been an outstanding member of Congress. But it has a long, wonderful history as being the San Antonio Congressional seat. Absolutely. I want to, speaking of some of the things that were written at the time, there were the San Antonio light quoted your dad at the time as saying about those bills, this type of legislation is in keeping with the old world and not the new world. I like equality, not third class and first class citizens. We have an old Spanish saying we are all children or stepchildren of God. I believe we are all Americans. Dad's whole thing was inclusion. And he always said, you know, you will never, you never gain equality by separating yourself. His whole thing was inclusion. And he came under a lot of criticism, even from members of, you know, the Mexican American community, about assimilation, acculturation, that you're losing your identity, that you're not proud. And dad just said, no, that's not true at all. You don't give up your heritage, your culture, your customs, but you have to become part of this country because there's so many people that really want to marginalize you and you can't play into their hands. And the country is better if everyone makes their own unique contribution, and it's not denied opportunity to really accomplish the most that they possibly can. What were some of the things, do you remember some of the things that your father talked about during the longest filibuster in Texas history? Well, dad's background, I mean, he was the most well read person I've ever met. And he was a real fan of different, you know, certain philosophers and historians. So he could go on forever. I mean, I used to think some of dad's speeches were actually filibusters, to be honest with you. And if you ever went to one of his testimonials or fundraisers, I mean, dad could go on for two hours, you know, I mean, gosh, I always wondered, oh, come on, dad, please. So it came in handy. He loved to talk. But what he would, they had certain rules, Charlotte, as I remember. You have to stay on topic. In other words, you have to discuss. He wasn't going to be reading what green eggs or whatever it is and ham or whatever. But he had plenty of material. He could have been up there forever. And the way the way that Senator Cason and dad is that you can't yield the floor, except for a question. Because yielding the floor ends the filibuster, in essence, but, you know, just for the purpose of a question. But if you stay off topic, off the bills, they'll call you on it. And it's like three strikes and you're out. After you violate the rules, that's the way I remember it. You yield the floor. It's over. We have a picture of them, don't we? Oh, gosh. I neglected to say, if you've got the picture of dad and Abraham Chick case, and it's one of my favorites, it's not the greatest quality. But that's afterwards. You're a little tired. I mean, look at these guys. But they were really quite brave and did things other individuals with thought of doing. But, you know, you're in the Senate and you're outnumbered. And people weren't crazy about dad, you know, being a Mexican American being in the Senate. And a lot of Texas was dry. I always tell this story because people wouldn't believe it. But, you know, I mean, dad was referred to as, I'm going to tell you, you know, they wouldn't say Mexican American, they would say Nescan. And so he was a Nescan. And I'm talking about other senators. This is crazy. But, and they would refer to Bear County as Bear County. The Nescan from Bear County, because Bear County in San Antonio had what? We had Lone Star beer. And we had Pearl, which we're quite proud of. It created all these jobs. But in certain areas of this state, at that time, they were dry. I mean Dallas, all these big areas, they were dry. And so I guess we were brewing evil brew over here. And dad represented these evil brewers. But all of it was so crazy. There were some really good men and women at that time. Women were not members of the Senate. But without the support of, you know, staff and such that were women, many of those individuals would have never succeeded. But no, dad was incredible. And he could have been there all day. And he could have, he would have gone, I mean, part of it would have been poetry, part of it would have been history, part of it would have been philosophy. But then just his own deductive reasoning. And this was just dad constantly, you know. So the Times, you know, Times Magazine was a big thing. And they covered it, as well as the Texas Observer, which was, I think dad's real feather in his cap was that the Texas Observer covered everything that he did. But this is what the Times Magazine quoted my father is saying, according to Jean Rodriguez, quote, the assault on the inward dignity of man, which our society protects has been made. And this is an assault on the very idea of America, which began as a new land of hope. For whom does the bell toll? You, the white man, think it tolls for the Negroes, comma, I say the toll, the bell tolls for you. It is ringing for all of us. And that was dad's point. It was, I mean, he knew he was dealing with races. But what he was trying to tell him is that this will be your demise if you continue this, if we don't come together, then the bell, you know, tolls for all of us. But I think that even back then, dad was always about inclusion. And if you don't do it, you risk everyone. And his thing was the classic, if the law doesn't protect you, in the end, it will not protect me. It was all about, really, it's about self-interest. If you really care about your family, your country, your community, then you want to empower everybody in it. And to the day he died, that's what he believed. And he has his words when you look at them today, when you look at them today, Charlie, you know, and you look at what's going on today in the Texas Legislature and in U.S. Congress, your father's words. Oh, I mean, he'd be outraged, I'm sure he would be angry. And then after he calmed down, he would try to figure out how do you get the message across? How do you try to reason with people that may not like you because of the color of your skin or skin or your gender, sexual orientation? I mean, things are pretty bad right now. I don't even want to tell you what the fifties and sixties were like. But I just wish more people would just rise to the occasion and think of us as together. I admire your dad's ability to tell people that by taking away the rights of others, they were going to lose something themselves. And I think that's an important part of finding a way to cross that divide, right? To say, you know, by denying this, you're going to be hurting you in the end. Sometimes these are temporary victories to gain some sort of temporary advantage that in the long run will hurt you. It will hurt everyone. I don't know if people say, you know what, this is the fair and just thing to do. So let's just do it. And it will work out because it is the fair and just thing to do rather than be fearful of being dispossessed or not having a privilege or an advantage that you used to enjoy because you're extending it to other people. Because that's where we are right now. I mean, this is the craziest thing we've ever seen. And his filibuster, according to the news accounts at the time, it says that his opponents agreed to withdraw four of the 10 bills if he would just stop talking. But he in case succeeded in stopping eight of those bills. But it really was an endurance test, right? And that's not that doesn't happen today with filibusters, right? Well, you know, the state Senate still in the state of Texas, it's like filibustering like Chick Payson and my dad did. It's more like, you know, Mr. Smith goes to Washington, but in the U.S. Senate, that is, I mean, to call it a filibuster, it should be an insult. And there's a long history of why they do it that way in the U.S. Senate. All it takes is one person to object, they can't move forward. And now they need 60 votes. But no one is standing there and holding the floor. You can do that. And usually that it's more theatrical for a short period of time, you're really not going to hold a floor long doing that. You just want the attention. But you're not holding anything up because all you have to do is say, because it's almost like the United States Senate operates on unanimous consent. And you probably have Aaron Bird to blame. And that's another whole wonderful story. But it fancies itself is the most deliberative body on the face of the earth, because it empowers one individual's voice to be heard, no matter what. The truth is, the filibuster in many ways was in a way to protect the smaller states that might get bullied or environment. But that doesn't hold true anymore. Well, yesterday, the piece of legislation to create the bipartisan commission to see about January the 6th was quote filibustered. It wasn't filibustered. I mean, people just said, we don't want to bring, you know, I object. I don't want it brought to the floor. Now you need 60 votes. And as we speak, and I don't know when this is going to play, but as we speak, at what cost do we continue the filibuster? Part of me wants it to be an enduring part of debate in the United States Senate. But when it is so abused, and to be honest with you, the people that voted, even the Republican members that voted, you probably have 58 votes out of 100 or less than 100, because 100 didn't vote. I forget how many didn't vote. So the bill would have passed. Had it been allowed to be debated. But no, it's a real abuse of something that is supposed to protect the voice of an individual senator or a state. My prediction is if we continue this way, the filibuster rule will change. It has already been changed as to judicial appointments in the Supreme Court. But when it changes for legislation, it'll be a sad day, because the abuse brought its demise. I'm hoping that doesn't happen, but it sure looks like people are infringed, and they're not going to let anything get out of the Senate. As opposed to the way that your father used the filibuster, which was to stand on principle for 22 hours, to literally stand on principle. And there's some wonderful public servants today, but the way things get crammed, the way the rules are changed to accommodate and basically prevail at all costs is totally unprincipled. Some of my fondest memories, Charlie, when I was in Congress, I was there for 14 years. And when I got there, out of the 14 years, all before, I was in the minority. I was at the mercy of members of the Republican Party. And I want to tell you, up until 2010, some of my fondest memories would have are serving with certain Republicans. Jim Leach on the financial service and banking committee, Mike Oxley on energy and commerce. I mean, wonderful memories. And I can tell you little stories about courtesies that were extended that really saved me from being pretty embarrassed. And the person that extended the courtesies is a Republican. I remember, you know, Frank Lucas from Oklahoma, just a real decent guy. But all that's gone. And it's very ugly. And I do believe the genesis of it was the election of Barack Obama and then the rise of the Tea Party in the election in 2010 that loaded up Congress with individuals that have no respect for the institution. But it still goes back to where my father was. I think it's all based on bigotry and prejudice and fear and insecurity. I don't understand why we haven't overcome it. It's 2021. I left in 2013 and only got worse. I don't have the answer other than good women and good men for the house. I don't have much hope because it's been gerrymandered to the point of abuse. For the Senate, I have, you know, greater hope. It can happen there, but it's not happening so far. And for the Texas Legislature, right now we just wish them sunny day. For the Texas Legislature, the fact that you'll have redistricting probably maybe at the end of the year or whatever. And the abuses there and the fact that you can't rely on the courts and we don't have the pre-clearance, the part of the Voting Rights Act, doesn't vote well. It does not vote well. But whoever's watching, I would encourage you, get into public office. You don't want to run for public office. Find a highly ethical, moral, upstanding woman or man to be your representative, to be your council member, to be on the school board. It all comes from the grassroots, the average voter. And not to be somehow peeled off or compromised on some cultural issue. Think overall policies that improve the quality of life for you and your family, your neighbor. You don't have to love somebody to wish them well, but how would you want to be treated? How would you want to be treated? And we're losing a lot of that. But we still have some incredible public servants and I've got great faith. I see a lot of young people today that I think they are the salvation. I like to think that baby boomers, that we advance the ball somewhat. A lot of mistakes along the way. But we lost ground and I'm hoping someone's going to make it up and advance it. Thank you. Thank you for taking the time. Thank you for reminding us about what came before. And so hopefully we can make better informed decisions about where we go from here.