<Begin Segment 2>

TI: Earlier you mentioned Spark Matsunaga. Can you talk about his role, not only during this time, but throughout the passage of the bill?

DI: Well, he... he was an amiable fellow, so he started rounding up the votes. And I did my part in the Senate. Spark wanted to go not just in the Senate, but in the House. Because he spent some time in the House, and many of the incumbents there were his buddies. So he played a very important role. Then when the commission was formed, it was, I think historically, one of the most distinguished commissions we've ever had. Can you imagine a Supreme Court Justice, a United States Senator, African American? A Justice of Jewish faith? Then we had a congressman who was openly opposed to it. We wanted to make it bipartisan. We didn't want it to be something that was loaded. And so -- [coughs] -- excuse me. When the hearings were concluded, and I think the hearings were historic, hundreds participated, and emotion just dripped all over the rooms. I went to two of them, and I must confess to you that I couldn't take anymore. I don't see how the others did. Then when the commission issued its recommendation, no one could believe it. It was perfect. Apology, they said it was no cause, no indictment, no trial, everything that we wanted, plus the monetary redress. And so I strongly suggested, I said, "This is your number, 442." And that's the number of the bill. And my strongest recommendation was, "Don't change any punctuation mark, take the whole recommendation and put it in. No more, no less. Then we can say it is not our recommendation, it is the recommendation of mayors and governors and senators and judges and justices." What more do you want?

TI: Excellent. So I'm going to now jump forward. And I wanted to get your thoughts when you were there, when President Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act.

DI: Before that...

TI: Okay.

DI: If there's any contribution that I made, it was one. I was on the Appropriations Committee, and so I spoke to the leadership of the Senate and the Appropriations Committee, and we had that proposal made into an entitlement. Otherwise, we'd be going back every year getting more funds. Because nowhere are you gonna get a billion dollars right off the bat. No one's gonna appropriate that kind of money. Even for the Department of Defense, it's difficult to get one billion dollars in one crack. Therefore, if it's an entitlement, you can go for a hundred million this time, fifty million next time. The only problem is they may have to wait. But once the law was passed, everyone living was entitled to it. It's like social security, you're entitled to it.

TI: And it was through your, sort of, knowledge and experience of the funding process that made you think that was the best way to fund this.

DI: Well, it was the only way.

TI: And so when that was proposed, you made a speech on the floor of the Senate. Do you remember, recall that when you...

DI: I made a few speeches, but...

TI: Can you describe that speech if you can?

DI: Well, all I remember -- I don't remember the words -- but it was a moment of high emotion. Because I remembered Rohwer. When I first visited the camp, I had no idea that there were camps of this nature. When we got the invitation, I just assumed that in Arkansas there was a small community of Japanese, and we're looking forward to that. Good time, all of us took our ukuleles and guitars. And we practiced and played all the way from Mississippi to Arkansas. On the way back, not one person spoke. It was just quiet. And I think all of them were thinking the same thought and question: "Would I have volunteered if I were in that camp?" That's a good question because I don't know what the answer is. I was eighteen, I was in today's situation, a bit rambunctious, an activist, and I would have said, "Nuts to you." I don't know.

TI: Good.

<End Segment 2> - Copyright © 2008 Densho. All Rights Reserved.