Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T17:25:43.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Red Scare Politics: California's Campaign Against Un-American Activities, 1940–1970

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2009

M. J. Heale
M. J. Heale
Affiliation:
Senior Lecturer in History at the University of Lancaster, Lancaster LA1 4YG and Associate Editor-elect of the Journal of American Studies.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The explanations for the red scare of the Cold War years have often been concerned with the direction taken by anti-Communist pressures. These have sometimes been represented as welling up from below, perhaps in the form of grassroots anxieties and resentments directed at well-to-do liberals and intellectuals, or as Catholic and immigrant enmity towards the Soviet Union. Such populistic currents may be portrayed as disturbing the normal routines of American politics. More often in recent years anti-Communist sentiments have been presented as elite-inspired influences working their way down in the polity, such as the anti-Soviet rhetoric and policies of the Truman administration, or the partisan opportunism of Republican politicians. The American political process itself may then be held to account. There have been a few attempts to test these interpretations by studies at state level, although it is not self-evident that such studies will favour either of these explanations. Indeed, the more detailed the study the more it is likely to acknowledge the complexity of American anti-communism. The evidence of California suggests that the second great red scare arose out of the convergence of pressures both from above and from below, in a process involving at least three different political dimensions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of American Studies , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , April 1986 , pp. 5 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For views tending to emphasize populistic, “radical right” origins of anti-Communism, see Bell, Daniel, ed., The Radical Right (New York, 1963)Google Scholar; Hofstadter, Richard, The Paranoid Style in American Politics (New York, 1965)Google Scholar; Lipset, Seymour Martin and Raab, Earl, The Politics of Unreason (New York, 1970)Google Scholar. Among the studies which tend to attribute responsibility to national political leaders or to various elites see Theoharis, Athan G., Seeds of Repression: Harry S. Truman and the Origins of McCarthyism (Chicago, 1971)Google Scholar; Rogin, Michael Paul, The Intellectuals and McCarthy: The Radical Specter (Cambridge, Mass., 1967)Google Scholar; Caute, David, The Great Fear: The Anti-Communist Purge under Truman and Eisenhower (New York, 1978)Google Scholar; Griffith, Robert and Theoharis, Athan, eds., The Specter: Original Essays on the Cold War and the Origins of McCarthyism (New York, 1974)Google Scholar. State and local studies include Carleton, Don E. “McCarthyism in Houston: The George Ebey Affair,” South-Western Historical Quarterly, 80 (10 1976), 163–76Google Scholar; Johnson, Ronald W., “The Korean War Red Scare in Missouri,” Red River Valley Historical Review, 4 (Spring 1979), 72–86Google Scholar; Sorenson, Dale Rich, “The Anticommunist Consensus in Indiana, 1945–1958,” (Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1980)Google Scholar; Holmes, Thomas Michael, “The Specter of Communism in Hawaii, 1947–53,” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Hawaii, 1975)Google Scholar; Selcraig, James Truett, The Red Scare in the Midwest, 1945–1955 (Ann Arbor, 1982)Google Scholar; Scobie, Ingrid Winther, “Jack B. Tenney: Molder of Anti-Communist Legislation in California, 1940–49,” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1970)Google Scholar; Long, Edward Robert, “Loyalty Oaths in California, 1947–1952: The Politics of Anti-Communism,” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, San Diego, 1981)Google Scholar.

2 Latham, Earl, The Communist Controversy in Washington: from the New Deal to McCarthy (New York, 1969)Google Scholar.

3 For broad sketches of California's political culture see Hill, Gladwin, Dancing Bear: an Inside Look at California Politics (Cleveland and New York, 1968)Google Scholar; McWilliams, Carey, ed., The California Revolution (New York, 1968)Google Scholar; Rogin, Michael P. and Shover, John L., Political Change in California: Critical Elections and Social Movements, 1890–1966 (Westport, Conn. 1970)Google Scholar; Bean, Walton, California: An Interpretative History (New York, 1978, 3rd edn.)Google Scholar; Wilson, James Q., “A Guide to Reagan Country: The Political Culture of Southern California,” Commentary, 43 (1967), 37–45Google Scholar. See also Clayton, James L., “Defense Spending: Key to California's Growth,” Western Political Quarterly, 15 (06 1962), 280–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar and “The Impact of the Cold War on the Economies of California and Utah, 1946–1965,” Pacific Historical Review, 36 (11 1967), 449–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Carney, Frances M., “The Decentralized Politics of Los Angeles,” Annals of the American Academy of Political Science, 352 (05 1964), 107–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Murray, Robert K., Red Scare: A Study of National Hysteria, 1919–1920 (Minneapolis, 1955), pp. 234–35Google Scholar; Layton, Edwin, “The Better America Federation: A Case Study of Superpatriotism,” Pacific Historical Review, 30 (1961), 137–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gottlieb, Robert and Wolt, Irene, Thinking Big: The Story of the Los Angeles Times, Its Publishers and Their Influence on Southern California (New York, 1977), pp. 186–203Google Scholar; McWilliams, Carey, Southern California Country: An Island on the Land (New York, 1946), pp. 289–293Google Scholar; McWilliams, Carey, Factories in the Field: The Story of Migratory Farm Labor in California, (Boston, 1939). pp. 230–63Google Scholar; Daniel, Cletus E., Bitter Harvest: A History of California Farmworkers, 1870–1941 (Berkeley, 1981), pp. 238–39, 251–54Google Scholar; Better America Federation of California Bulletin (Los Angeles), 19 02, 29 04, 3 06, 8 07 1932Google Scholar.

5 Murdock, Steve, “California Communists – Their Years of Power,” Science and Society, 34 (Winter 1970), 480–84Google Scholar; Nelson, Steve et al. , Steve Nelson, American Radical (Pittsburgh, 1981), pp. 253–54Google Scholar; Kenny, Robert W., “My First Forty Years in California politics, 1922–1962,” (Oral History Program, Bancroft Library, Berkeley), p. 115Google Scholar. Kenny describes a “Committee for Political Unity.” On pro-Olson, popular front activities in Hollywood, see Ceplair, Larry and Englund, Steven, The Inquisition in Hollywood: Politics in the Film Community, 1930–1960 (Berkeley, 1977), ch. 4Google Scholar.

6 Burke, Robert B., Olsen's New Deal for California (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1953), pp. 36–38Google Scholar; Hill, Gladwin, Dancing Bear, pp. 88–90Google Scholar; Leiby, James “State Welfare Administration in California, 1930–45,” Southern California Quarterly, 55 (Fall 1973), 312–13, 315CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Nelson, , Steve Nelson, American Radical, p. 247Google Scholar; Kenny, “My First Forty Years,” p. 132; McWilliams, Carey, The Education of Carey McWilliams (New York, 1979), p. 93Google Scholar. See also Ceplair and Englund, Inquisition in Hollywood, ch. 5.

8 Burke, , Olson's New Deal, pp. 119–23, 126–31Google Scholar; San Francisco Chronicle, 1, 2, 4 Feb., 6 Dec. 1940; Ainsworth, Ed, Maverick Mayor: A Biography of Sam Yorty, of Los Angeles (Garden City, N.Y., 1966), p. 100Google Scholar; Kenny, “First Forty Years,” pp. 129–30, 134–35.

9 Badger, Anthony J., “The New Deal and the Localities,” in Jeffreys-Jones, Rhodri and Collins, Bruce, eds., The Growth of Federal Power in American History (Edinburgh, 1983), p. 109Google Scholar; Kenny, “First Forty Years,” p. 115; Tenney, Jack B., The Tenney Committee… The American Record (Tujunga, Cal., 1952), pp. 21–24Google Scholar; Ainsworrh, , Maverick Mayor, p. 96Google Scholar; San Francisco Chronicle, 11, 12 Jan. 1939; Burns, Hugh M., “Legislative and Political Concerns of the Senate Pro Tem, 1957–1970,” (Regional Oral History Office, Bancroft Library, Berkeley), p. ivGoogle Scholar; McWilliams, , Education of Carey McWilliams, pp. 146–47Google Scholar.

10 San Francisco Chronicle, 1, 2, 4, 6, 14 Feb., 8 March 1940; Tenney, , The Tenney Committee, pp. 1–21Google Scholar; Tenney, Jack B., “California Legislator,” (Oral History Program, UCLA, 1969), pp. 426–27Google Scholar.

11 Kenny “First Forty Years,” p. 135; Weaver, John D., Warren: The Man, The Court, The Era (Boston, 1967) pp. 72–73Google Scholar; Legislature, California, Report of the Assembly Relief Investigating Committee on Subversive Acvities (Sacramento, 1940), p. 50Google Scholar and passim; Aubrey Grossman to ACLU, New York, 5 July 1940; Ernest Besig to J. R. Oppenheimer, 4 Sept. 1940; Oppenheimer to Besig, 8 Sept. 1940, American Civil Liberties Union Papers, File 677 “1940 Yorty Committee,” California Historical Society, San Francisco. The Stockton victims were subsequently pardoned by Governor Olson; see Burke, , Olson's New Deal, p. 168Google Scholar. The ACLU as a national body was wary of appearing to champion the rights of Communists in the 1940s and 1950s; see McAuliffe, Mary S., Crisis on the Left: Cold War Politics and American Liberals, 1947–1954 (Amherst, 1978), ch. 7Google Scholar.

12 Weaver, , Warren, pp. 95–96Google Scholar; Los Angeles Times, 22 Sept, 1940; Kenny, “First Forty Years,” p. 143; Stevenson, Janet, The Undiminished Man: A Political Biography of Robert Walker Kenny (Novato, Cal., 1980), pp. 30–31Google Scholar; San Francisco Chronicle, 13 Oct. 1940. The State Supreme Court subsequently found the 1940 law to be unconstitutional.

13 On party weaknesses in California see Cresap, Dean R., Party Politics in the Golden State (Los Angeles, 1954), ch. 1Google Scholar and passim; on Roosevelt, the New Deal, and HUAC, see, inter alia, Carr, Robert K., The House Committee on Un-American Activities, 1945 1950 (Ithaca, N.Y. 1952), ch. 1Google Scholar; Goodman, Walter, The Committee: The Extraordinary Career of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, (New York, 1968), chs. 1 and 2Google Scholar; Dies, Martin, Martin Dies' Story (New York, 1963), p. 158Google Scholar; Kutler, Stanley I., The American Inqeuisition: Justice and Injustice in the Cold War (New York, 1982), p. 136Google Scholar (for the quotation about Roosevelt).

14 Legislature, California, Report [of] Joint Fact-Finding Committee on Un-American Activities in California to California Legislature (Sacramento, 1943), pp. 511Google Scholar (hereinafter cited as CUAC, First Report); Leary, Mary Ellen, “California's Lonely Secret Agent,” Los Angeles Times “West Magazine,” 2 04 1967, p. 39Google Scholar.

15 ACLU, The States and Subversion (New York, 1953), p. 5Google Scholar and 36th Annual Report (1956), p. 25; Boston Traveller, 2 April 1951; Los Angeles Times, 26 Sept. 1944. Scobie, Ingrid Winther, in “Jack B. Tenney: Molder of Anti-Communist Legislation in California, 1940–49,” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1970)Google Scholar, and “Jack B. Tenney and the ‘Parasitic Menace’: Anti-Communist Legislation in California 1940–1949,” Pacific Historical Review, 43 (05 1974), 188–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar, has argued that Tenney's political significance lay in his sponsorship of anti-Communist legislation. Tenney did submit many anti-Communist bills, but his real impact lay outside the legislature, in tormenting suspect groups in California, and even anti-Communists elsewhere used his committee's “Communist Front” listings against their own opponents; e.g. see ACLU, The States and Subversion (New York 1953), p. 5Google Scholar; Carleton, Don Edward, “A Crisis of Rapid Change: The Red Scare in Houston, 1945–1955,” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Houston, 1978), pp. 185, 197–212Google Scholar. Barrett, Edward L. Jr, The Tenney Committee: Legislative Investigation of Subversive Activities in California (Ithaca, N.Y. 1951)Google Scholar, was written by a law professor as part of the Cornell Studies in Civil Liberty edited by Robert E. Cushman in the early 1950s.

16 On parties, lobbies and the press, see Cresap, , Party Politics, ch. 1 and pp. 36, 54, 61, 63, 81, 93Google Scholar; Weaver, , Warren, pp. 57, 140–41, 174–75Google Scholar; Samish, Arthur H. and Thomas, Bob, The Secret Boss of California: The Life and High Times of Art Samish (New York 1971), pp. 128–30Google Scholar; Gottlieb, and Wolt, , Thinking Big, pp. 244, 247, 271Google Scholar; Raymond E. Wolfinger and Fred I. Greenstein, “Comparing Political Regions,” p. 82n.; Shields, Currin V., “A Note on Party Organizasion: The Democrats in California,” Western Political Quarterly, 7 (12 1954), 676–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar; California Un-American Activities Committee, (hereafter CUAC) Third Report, 1947, p. 5.

17 Cresap, , Party Politics, pp. 52–53, 60–61, 63Google Scholar; Senator Kenny quoted in Stevenson, , Undiminished Man, p. 27Google Scholar; Leary, Mary Ellen, “A Journalist's Perspective: Government and Politics in California and the Bay Area,” (Regional Oral History Office, Bancroft Library, Berkeley), p. 110Google Scholar.

18 In CUAC's 1943 report “Communism” rated 164 pages, compared with 64 for “Nazi Activities” and 31 for “Japanese Activities.” For sources for this paragraph, see CUAC, First Report, 1943, Second Report, 1945, pp. 147–48, 159Google Scholar and passim; Los Angeles Times, 26 Sept 1944; Goodman, , The Committee, pp. 158–61Google Scholar; Voorhis, Jerry, Confessions of a Congressman (Garden City, N.Y. 1947), pp. 335–38Google Scholar; Bullock, Paul, “‘Rabbits and Radicals’: Richard Nixon's 1946 Campaign Against Jerry Voorhis,” Southern California Quarterly, 55 (Fall 1973), 319–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 San Francisco Chronicle, 1 July 1945; The Sun (Baltimore), 1 Oct. 1946.

20 Tenney, “California Legislator,” pp. 1303–06, 1345–48; CUAC Third Report, 1947, p. 46Google Scholar, Fourth Report, 1948, p. 8; Los Angeles Times, 26 March 1948; San Francisco Chronicle, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 Nov. 1 March 1949.

21 The committee described some of its activities in its reports: Third Report, 1947, Fourth Report, 1948, Fifth Report, 1949. On the potential revival of popular front politics and the Wallace movement, see McWilliams, , Education of Carey McWilliams, pp. 120–21, 127Google Scholar; Starobin, Joseph R., American Communism in Crisis, 1943–1957 (Cambridge, Mass., 1972), pp. 110–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nelson, , Steve Nelson, p. 271Google Scholar; Hamby, Alonzo L., Beyond the New Deal: Harry S. Truman and American Liberalism (New York, 1973), pp. 199–201, 218–19, 263Google Scholar. See also Tenney Committee's “Analysis of Communist Front Organisations,” in Fourth Report, 1948, pp. 23–90Google Scholar, and “Communist Front Organisations,” ibid, 91–393.

22 CUAC, Third Report, 1947, pp. 116–17, 137, 321, 353Google Scholar, Seventh Report, 1953, pp. 150–51; Call-Bulletin (San Francisco), 6 Feb., 15, 22 May 1947; Los Angeles Times, 6 Feb. 1947; Southern California Branch of ACLU, Open Forum (Los Angeles), 21 09 1946Google Scholar.

23 Tenney, “California Legislator,” pp. 1333–34; Goodman, , The Committee, p. 199Google Scholar; San Francisco Chronicle, 21 Oct. 1947.

24 Call-Bulletin, 18 April, 15, 22 May, 17, 18, 21, 23 June 1947; San Francisco Chronicle, 22 June, 5, 6, 9 Nov. 1947; Tenney, “California Legislator,” pp. 1345–48; Open Forum, 22 Feb. 1947; CUAC, Third Report, 1947, p. 46Google Scholar.

25 Tenney, , “Address by the Honorable Jack B. Tenney, California State Senator,” in All-American Conference Proceedings, Hotel Astor, New York City,January 28–29, 1950(in Library of Congress)Google Scholar; CUAC, Fourth Report 1948, pp. 15–19Google Scholar; Barrett, , The Tenney Committee, pp. 34–36Google Scholar; Open Forum, 1 May 1948.

26 CUAC, Fourth Report, 1948 pp. 91–393Google Scholar; Tenney, “California legislator,” pp. 1395–96; Counterattack (New York), 5 March 1948.

27 Los Angeles Times, 26 March 1948, 11 May 1949; Open Forum, 10 July 1948, 2 Oct. 1948; Sacramento Bee, 11, 12, 18, 25 Jan. 1948; San Francisco Chronicle, 24, 26, 27 May 1949; “Citizens of the Sixteenth Congressional District” to “All California Legislators,” n.d., and “Statement of League of Women Voters of California …,” April 1949, in Robert W. Kenny Papers, Bancroft Library, Berkeley; CUAC, Fifth Report, 1949, p. 9Google Scholar; Lincoln, Luther H., “Young Turk to Speaker of the California Assembly, 1948–1958,” (Oral History Office, Bancroft Library, 1980), p. 14Google Scholar.

28 Los Angeles Times 26 March 1948, 11, 19, 20 May 1949; Sacramento Bee 10, 16, 17, 18, 19, 24 May 1949; San Francisco Chronicle, 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27 May, 7 June 1949; “Citizens of the Sixteenth Congressional District” to “All California Legislators,” n.d., “Statement of League of Women Voters of California…,” Jack B. Tenney, “Appeal to All Californians,” n.d., and Leon Charles and Howard A. Jarvis, “Why Doesn't Someone Do Something About Communism?” 7 June 1949, in Kenny Papers.

29 San Francisco Chronicle, 8, 9, 10, 21, 25, 30 June 1949; Los Angeles Times, 20 May, 25 June 1949; Sacramento Bee, 6, 23, 24, 25, 30 June 1949; Tenney, , The Tenney Committee, pp. 78, 87–88Google Scholar; Tenney, “California Legislator,” p. 1598; McWilliams, Carey, “Mr Tenney's Horrible Awakening,” The Nation, 169 (23 07 1949), 80–82Google Scholar; Yorty's remark is in the Sacramento Bee, 6 June 949, and Tenney's in “California Legislator,” p. 1574.

30 Los Angeles Times, 15 March 1947; CUAC, Fourth Report 1949, pp. 611, 614Google Scholar; Open Forum, 21 August, 30 Oct., 1948; Ford, John Anson, Thirty Explosive Years in Los Angeles County (San Marino, Cal., 1961), p. 169Google Scholar. On the origins and development of loyalty oath legislation see Long, Edward Robert, “Loyalty Oaths in California, 1947 1952: The Politics of Anti-Communism,” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, San Diego, 1981)Google Scholar. This thesis is particularly good on the towns of Los Angeles and San Francisco, and concludes that anti-Communist measures were most likely to be averted where left-centre political coalitions were sustained.

31 Tenney, “California Legislator,” p. 1139; CUAC, Second Report, 1945, pp. 115–136Google Scholar, Third Report, 1947, pp. 109–110, Seventh Report, 1953, p. 201; Open Forum, 12 Jan. 1946; San Francisco Chronicle, 12, 13, 14, 22, 25, 26 June 1949. See also Gardner, David P., The California Oath Controversy (Berkeley, 1967) pp. 1–22, 31–37Google Scholar.

32 E.g. ACLU, Annual Report, 1947–1948, p. 30Google Scholar; Barbara, SantaNews-Press in Open Forum, 2 10 1948Google Scholar.

33 Pates, Gordon, “California – The Oath Epidemic,” The Reporter, (26 12 1950), pp. 29–31Google Scholar; Koen, Ross Y., The China Lobby in American Politics, (New York, 1974), pp. 51, 55Google Scholar.

34 Open Forum, 22 July 1950; Los Angeles Times, 5 Aug. 1950; Sacramento Bee, 21 Sept. 1950; Federation for the Repeal of the Levering Act (FRLA), California's New Layalty (San Francicso, n.d.) passim; Pates, “The Oath Epidemic,” p. 29.

35 Scobie, Ingrid Winther, “Helen Gahagan Douglas and Her 1950 Senate Race with Richard M. Nixon,” Southern California Quarterly, 58 (Spring 1976), 113–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Reichley, James, States in Crisis: Politics in Ten American States 1950–1962 (Chapel Hill, N.C. 1963), p. 172Google Scholar; The Sun (Baltimore), 2 Nov. 1950; Sacremento Bee, 8 Jan. 1951.

36 Sacramento Bee, 8 Jan., 18 May 1951; Open Forum, 18 Aug. 1951, Sept., Nov. 1952. Call Bulletin, 26 April 1951; “ACLU Legislative Bulletin,” Open Forum, March–April 1953; Sollen, Robert H., “Do They Deserve to be Free?” The Christian Century, 75 (20 08 1958), 945–47Google Scholar; CUAC, Ninth Report, 1957, pp. 154–57Google Scholar; Monroe, Eason, “Safeguarding Civil Liberties,” (Oral History Program, 1974, Bancroft Library), pp. 92, 116–17Google Scholar; ACLU, Annual Report, 1953–54, pp. 40–41Google Scholar; Brown, Ralph S. Jr, Loyalty and Security: Employment Tests in the United States (New Haven, 1958), p. 104n.Google Scholar; Long, “Loyalty Oaths,” ch. 7; FRLA The Repeal Newsletter, 11 April 1952 and “Second Annual Report, January 23, 1953,” in ACLU Papers, California Historical Society, San Francisco.

37 FRLA, The Repeal Newsletter, 13 12 1950Google Scholar; ACLU, Thirteenth Annual Report (1951), pp. 30–31Google Scholar, Annual Report for 1973–1954, pp. 40–41; Open Forum, Nov. 1952; Gardner, California Oath Controversy, passim; The Fresno Bee, 8 June 1955.

38 Tenney, “California Legislator,” p. 822; Mitford, Jessica, A Fine Old Conflict (New York, 1977), pp. 202–03Google Scholar; CUAC, Sixth Report, 1951, pp. 101–52Google Scholar; Ninth Report, 1957, pp. 1–125; Leary, “California's Lonely Secret Agent,” pp. 33–40.

39 CUAC, Seventh Report, 1953, pp. 78, 121, 209–11Google Scholar, Eighth Report, 1955, pp. 75–77, 180–81, 396–418, Ninth Report, 1957, p. 158; Brown, , Loyalty and Security pp. 101, 104Google Scholarn.; ACLU, Annual Report, 1953–54, p. 37Google Scholar.

40 Leary, “California's Lonely Secret Agent,” passim; ACLU, Annual Report, 1954–55, p. 43Google Scholar; Caute, David, The Great Fear: The Anti-Communist Purge Under Truman and Eisenhower (New York, 1978), pp. 131, 404, 424Google Scholar; CUAC, Seventh Report, 1953, p. 135Google Scholar.

41 Goodman, , The Committee, pp. 274, 313, 319Google Scholar, Brown, , Loyalty and Security, p. 117nGoogle Scholar.; CUAC, Seventh Report, 1953, pp. 141–49Google Scholar; Eighth Report, 1955, p. 393.

42 Richards, Richard, “South of the Tehachapis: A Southern California Senator Comments on the 1953–1966 Era,” (Regional Oral History Office, 1978, 1979, Bancroft Library), pp. 32, 93, 94, 99Google Scholar. Rogin, and Shover, , Political Change in California, p. 139Google Scholar; San Francisco Chronicle, 9 May 1955. See also the committee's reports. Its Ninth Report, 1957, was only 164 pages in length, compared with the several hundred that had once been the norm. In the next two years the committee apparently held no new hearings and its Tenth Report, 1959, consisted almost entirely of old material.

43 Brown, , Loyalty and Security, p. 103Google Scholar; Caute, , The Great Fear, pp. 156–58Google Scholar; ACLU, Thirty-Sixth Annual Report, (1956), pp. 4, 25Google Scholar; CUAC, Tenth Report, 1959, pp. 187–200Google Scholar; Sollen, “Do They Deserve to be Free,” pp. 945–47; Monroe, “Safeguarding Civil Liberties,” pp. 314–15; Rowe, Frank, The Enemy Among Us: A Story of Witch-bunting in the McCarthy Era (Sacramento, 1980), pp. 113–14, 124Google Scholar; Caughey, John W., “Farewell to California's ‘Loyalty’ Oath,” Pacific Historical Review, 38 (05 1969), 123–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Long, “Loyalty Oaths,” ch. 8.

44 CUAC, Eleventh Report, 1961, passim; Fourteenth Report, 1967, passim; Fifteenth Report, 1970, pp. 9–11; Burns, “Legislative and Political Concetns,” p. 60; Legislature of California, Journal of the Senate: Regular Session, 1970, pp. 1899–1901, 4646. The retirements of Burns and Combs in 1970 effectively marked the end of the committee. When the new president pro tem. in 1971 discovered that the committee had been keeping files on senators who had voted against its appropriation, it was not renewed: Bean, Walton, California: An Interpretive History (3rd edn, New York, 1978), p. 396Google Scholar.

45 Griffith, Robert, “American Politics and the Origins of ‘McCarthyism’,” in Griffith, and Theoharis, , eds., The Specter, pp. 14–15Google Scholar; on popular opposition to the Levering Oath see Open Forum, Nov. 1952, Monroe, “Safegusarding Civil Liberties,” p. 92; FRLA, “Second Annual Report,”pp. 4–6.

46 Wolfinger and Greenstein, “Repeal of Fair Housing,” pp. 753–69 and “Comparing Political Regions,” pp. 74–85; Rogin, and Shover, , Political Change in California, ch. 6Google Scholar; Cresap, , Party Politics, pp. 53–54, 61, 80–81, 93Google Scholar; Shields, “A Note on Party Organization,” pp. 673–83; the quotation is from Reichley, , States in Crisis, p. 166Google Scholar.