Civil Rights Act of 1964

is not responsible for substantial gains in black economic welfare. The gains of the 1960s were the result of human capital enhancement, not of demand-side policies addressed to ameliorate the impact of discrimination.

James Smith and Finis Welch (1989) argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was not responsible for substantial gains in black economic welfare. They conceded that black economic welfare improved about the time of the federal initiatives in the 1960s, but they contended that the gains were the result of human capital enhancement, not of demand-side policies addressed to ameliorate the impact of discrimination. To buttress their view that Title VII - the section in the Civil Rights Act prohibiting employment discrimination based on, inter alia, race or color - generated no benefits for black workers, Smith and Welch argued that the economic gains of blacks during the period 1940-60 were the same as those in the 1960-80 period (thereby suggesting that the Civil Rights act of 1964 had been unimportant).

is not responsible for gains in black economic welfare. Title VII - the section in the Civil Rights Act prohibiting employment discrimination based on, inter alia, race or color - generated no benefits for black workers as evidence by the fact that the economic gains of blacks during the period 1940-60 were the same as those in the 1960-80 period.

is to thank for gains in black economic welfare. Title VII generates a decade of economic gains for blacks, as evidenced by the fact that the long-term picture from at least 1920-1990 has been one of black relative stagnation with the exception of two periods - that around World War II and that following the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

The major response to Smith and Welch came from Donohue and Heckman (1991), who argued that Title VII did indeed generate a decade of economic gains for blacks: .... the evidence of sustained economic advance for blacks over the period 1965-1975 is not inconsistent with the fact that the racial wage gap declined by similar amounts in the two decades following 1940 as in the two decades following 1960. The long-term picture from at least 1920-1990 has been one of black relative stagnation with the exception of two periods - that around World War II and that following the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. (Donohue and Heckman, 1991, p.1614)

is not widely believe to have increased the demand for black labor, leading to both greater levels of employment and higher wages in the decade after its adoption

It is not widely accepted that, in helping to break down the extreme discriminatory patterns of the Jim Crow South, Title VII considerably increased the demand for black labour, leading to both greater levels of employment and higher wages in the decade after its adoption (see also, Freeman et al. 1973; Conroy, 1994; and Orfield and Ashkinaze, 1991). Chayotes (1998) shows that, when the reach of the 1964 Civil Rights Act was expanded in 1972, the demand for black labour was further stimulated. But the good news in terms of law-induced efforts to improve the economic status of blacks through anti-discrimination policy has probably run its course.

civil rights act of 1964, n.All

civil rights act of 1964