The Equal Rights Amendment enshrines equal protection under the law regardless of sex.
Or, it would have, if it was ratified.
Illinois became a battleground state in the fight to get the ill-fated amendment through Congress in the 1970s and '80s. Historian and author Mark DePue sat down with Local Edition to discuss his new book chronicling the era, "Elusive Victory: The Equal Rights Amendment Fight in Illinois."
—
Ben Singson
I am here with Mark DePue, retired oral history director of the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum. We're here to talk about his book, "Elusive Victory: The Equal Rights Amendment Fight in Illinois." Mark, thank you very much for taking some time to talk with me.
Mark DePue
Glad to be here, Ben.
Ben Singson
All right, so obviously the Equal Rights Amendment was a little before my time, and it might be a little before the time of some people listening to this. So for anyone who doesn't already know, could you just go over what the Equal Rights Amendment was and why you thought it was important to document its history here?
Mark DePue
Well, it's been percolating since 1923. I think Congress every year since 1923 had advanced it as a possibility, but it finally cleared Congress in 1972, and it is essentially what it sounds like it is. It's to establish equal rights for women as a constitutional right. It would be a constitutional amendment at that time in 72. And when it was cleared Congress, they had seven years to get it ratified by three-fourths of the state, which means that 38 states needed to ratify it. And when I started at the Presidential Library in 2006 as the oral historian, I found out about this. I didn't get to Illinois until 1989, so it wasn't something I personally witnessed, but I found out that Illinois had never ratified it. And I said, well, that seems kind of strange. I mean, Illinois back at that time was a relatively progressive state. It typically supported these kinds of things. And so I figured, well, there's got to be a story there. And boy was I right. There was definitely a story about why it never got ratified in Illinois, even though it lasted not seven years, but 10, because they extended the deadline by three years.
Ben Singson
Gotcha. So why wasn't this amendment ratified here?
Mark DePue
There are two main reasons that I clearly spell out in the book. One is because there is a new Illinois state constitution in 1970, and that constitution had a provision in it that required three-fifths of the legislature, both bodies of the legislature, to ratify any kind of an amendment to the federal constitution, the state as well, but the federal constitution. The other one was that Phyllis Schlafly was a resident of Illinois. I assume you recognize that name.
Ben Singson
A little bit, yeah.
Mark DePue
People back in the 1970s and 80s, nationwide, they knew that name. And she was from Alton, Illinois and was a staunch opponent to the ERA.
Ben Singson
Gotcha, gotcha. What were her reasons for opposing this thing so strongly?
Mark DePue
She had two main reasons when I asked her about this and I had an extensive interview with her as well as lots of other people, mostly women, about the Equal Rights Amendment. There's 49 interviews that are featured in this book and most of them are rather substantial quotations. But anyway, her main argument was one, it's already in the Constitution. Everything in the Constitution is talked about the people. So, all the rights that are subscribed to people in the Constitution apply obviously to women as well. She also made the point, and I think this is the thing that really rallied support from a lot of women across the country, was that they were lots of laws in each one of the states that dealt specifically with things like marriage, divorce, child custody, et cetera. And almost all of those were, I guess she would argue, favoring women in terms of support for a stay-at-home mother or a divorced woman with children. And those were protections she thought could be lost if the Equal Rights Amendment was passed. And there was one other thing that became a moot point pretty quickly, and that was if there's an Equal Rights Amendment, that means that women would be subject to the draft. And men were still being drafted in 72 because of the Vietnam War. That didn't last too much longer, but that was a potent argument for some, certainly.
Ben Singson
Gotcha, gotcha. When the supporters recall when they like learned or learned that this amendment was not going to be ratified here, do you remember what they felt like?What the mood was among them?
Mark DePue
This culminated in 1982. So we're talking 10 or 11 years that this was fought out in the Illinois legislature. And by the time you get to 81 and especially 82, there was a lot of angst among the supporters that this wasn't going to be able to clear the hurdle that they were expecting would be easily cleared back 10 years before that time. So there was there was a group of women who called themselves the grassroots group of second-class citizens, and they were unapologetically radical about it. And they did some things. There was a woman from Utah, she wasn't necessarily affiliated with this group, that had a hunger strike right on the floor of the Illinois legislature that happened about a month or so before the end date, which was in June of 82. And so there was hunger strikers going on and sitting in the legislature, and there was always a crowd of women, both pro and con. The supporters wore green, the opponents wore red, and God forbid, if you're a lobbyist and you're there wearing a red tie or green tie, you're gonna be a target for these ladies on both sides to come after you. But the grassroots group of second-class citizens really, when it was too late, upped up their protests and they staged a lockdown. Actually, a group of them locked themselves outside the Senate chamber so that senators, if they're going to get into the Senate chamber, would have to step over them because they had padlocked and chained themselves to the Senate doors. So that happened right before the last vote. And when the vote finally went down and was once more defeated in Illinois with three more states to go in the country to get to that 38 states, there was a few of the women, the leader of the grassroots group and several others, decided they were going to paint the names of their opponents in pig's blood. No one knew what kind of blood it was when they showed up with these ketchup bottles filled with pig's blood, but they did just that. And that was after the election had been, the vote had been lost and it was not going to be ratified in Illinois. So if you talk to a lot of the legislators themselves who were very strong supporters of ERA, they knew that all this these activities, let's put it that way, that the grassroots group were doing was totally counterproductive. As far as Phyllis Schlafel and her supporters were concerned, they went out to Washington, D.C. and they had a big celebration in Washington, D.C. after it was defeated.
Ben Singson
You mentioned that by the time that this was shot down in the state Congress, the state legislature, there was a lot of, you know, angst among its supporters. When you spoke to them, 40 odd years later, did any of them have that - did any of them - were any of them still bitter or broken up about losing this fight?
Mark DePue
Oh, absolutely. And they have strong feelings about Mrs. Schlafly, as you might imagine, and others as well. I think it's very interesting that This culture war continues on. I mean, the state of Illinois ratified it, was it 2017 or 2018? One year later, I think 2018, Virginia ratified it and that reached 38. Well, it's a bit late because it expired in 1982, but the supporters of ERA are willing to make the constitutional point that, hey, it's ratified now. and I wouldn't be surprised that we'll see it resurrected here in the near future as well to see what happens with it.
Ben Singson
There's one question I meant to ask earlier and I might just, I think I'm just going to ask you this now and then put it back into the interview at an earlier point. You also spoke with Phyllis Schlafly and other supporters, opponents rather, excuse me, Sorry. You spoke with Phyllis Schlafly and other opponents of this amendment. They obviously got what they wanted in 1982. How did they feel about it? How did they feel about the amendment 40 plus years later? Did they have any regrets? Do they still stand by their decision? What did they have to say?
Mark DePue
I heard no regrets. Phyllis Schlafly was one of the most powerful, articulate, able organizers and motivators in the country at that time, which meant that she was one of the most hated women in the country at that time. She didn't back off one iota from it. And I didn't hear anything from other opponents in that respect either. They were still happy that it got defeated and didn't think it was necessary. I finished the book by noting where women were in society in the 1970s versus where women are in society today. Generally in things like medical schools, there's a majority of women now. There's close to that. It may be just the same thing is true for law school. It's certainly you're seeing a lot more women involved in politics. We just recently saw that this last election. So there's a lot of progress. I think the supporters of the ERA would be able to say that have been made in those 40 plus years, 50 years since ERA. That doesn't mean that they don't think we still need an equal rights amendment. The thing that is always brought up by the supporters is the difference in pay scale. That has changed dramatically in those intervening years as well, but there's still a little bit of a disparity between how much men and women are getting paid. So that's one of the things that always comes up in the discussion.
Ben Singson
Gotcha, gotcha. All right, Mark DePue, author of "Elusive Victory: The Equal Rights Amendment Fight in Illinois." Thank you very much.
Mark DePue
Thank you, Ben.
Ben Singson
Elusive Victory is available through Southern Illinois University Press.
